Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1894-01-16

( OF the mem berS had entered the Atuel-
mems chamber in 3 good-natured spirit
! for the purpose OF listening 10 the de-
bate and gathering ideas. While here,
however. they had been compelled TO
! hear themselves assailed unmerclfuliy.
Speaking for the Common Council, ne
disavowed any intentional discourtesy
toward the Aldermen on the part OF
that board and, as an evidence OF his
assertion, he said that body had recon
sidered their vote asking for the return
Of the charter. Moreover, Mr.. Snow
den said. he knew OF no rule compelling
either board TO notify the other when
about to adjourn. As matter OF cour-
teSy though it was generally done.
Mr.. Carlin was glad 10 hear Mr..
Snowden's statement, which, to him,
was perfectly satisfactory.
Mr.. Sweeney disavowed any intention
of attacking the Common Council aid
the matter ended in pleasantly on all
sides. and later the Aldermen adjourn
ed without considering the amended
charter any further.
COMMON COUNCIL.
The first business was q communica-
ton from the authorities Of the Catho-
lie congregation declaring that it had
not Withdrawn objection 10 the use OF
its land for the extension of south Pitt
street
Mr.. Cation said he did not say that
the Catholic congregation had with
drawn objections. but that he under
stood from their petition that they
submitted the matter to the Corpora
ton Attorney. He assured the board
that no steps would be taken in the
matter until the Corporation Attorney
should nave made his report to Coun-
Gil
The communication was received and
referred
Mr.. snowden, Mr.. Thompson in the
chair, said he had voted with the pre-
vailing side at the last meeting for the
charter amendment bill and he now
moved TO reconsider the vote by which
the bill was passed.
Mr.. Sno~den said il seemed 10 MIN
that many OF the amendments proposed
al the last meeting had been TOO hastily
adopted. He was convinced that the
city could not do without the Superin-
tendent of Police in some form or other
Tax Collector German had told him
that the efficiency OF the tax office
would not be improved by putting all
the work of two collectors upon one.
and that the reduction in cost would be
but slight. One man cannot afford 10
carry over that large amount OF credit
left for taxes at the close OF the
fiscal year. The bond would have
to be larger and Of course
the security would be more difficult TO
obtain We will have TO have a super
ntendent of light, for the present need
is for more and not less superintend-
ence of the light department. He
thought that in the effort to curtail ex-
penses some of the wrong Offices had
been struck at.
The proposed general tax of ten
cents per front foot was an onerous
tax and one which was unfair, a. il
would operate to substantially confs-
cate the lots on the outskirts in order
to make improvements in the thickly
settled parts Of the city.
Mr.. Fisher agreed with the chair in
some respects, but he thought that
these Objectionable features would be
stricken out by the Aldermen: so that
there would be no need to reconsider
the bill. as it would come back in the
ordinary course Of proceedings.
AIr. Cation said that he, too. agreed
in some respects with the chair. He
had at the last night of meeting hoped
that fuller debate would have taken
place. He regretted that more time
WIS not taken in considering his ten
cent tax per front foot and ne was not
welded to that plan. 1t was not, how
ever, unfair, as the unimproved prop
erty would for some time be the re-
cipient of most Of the benefit, as most
Of the new work would be done on the
outskirts OF the city.
Mr.. Snowden did not wish to take any
chance IS the matter was too important.
and thought the vote should be recon
sidered
Mr.. Uhler did not think the City
Council did wrong at its last meeting.
He thought the action taken was prop
er. The 10 cent tax was just one even
if it did bear heavily upon the suburban
lots. They had paid very little hereto
fore.
Mr.. Snowden asked what had been
done with the taxes collected from the
outlying property for 100 years. Had
it not all been spent in the interior OF
the city?
Mr.. Uhler said that the built-up por-
ton of the town had paid two-thirds OF
all the street improvements. 1t was
true that the new sewers had been built
out of the general fund.
The bill was reconsidered, Z to 5, and
the clerk was directed TO ask the Alder
men to return the bill.
The Aldermen having declined to re
turn the bill the motion to reconsider
was itself reconsidered.
Mr.. Uhler made the point of order
that as the Aldermen had acted on GER
tain amendments to the bill its return
would not be in order.
Mr.. Cation moved to ask that the
paper be returned, because that was
the proper course. He said he did not
think that Council would get the paper
back. because he felt certain thai some
of the Aldermen had devoted all their
spare time to getting up speeches to be
delivered on the charter question, and
while he did not like to make eloquence
superhuous, he felt obliged to make
| that motion.
Mr.. Fisher opposed the motion as
useless and unparliamentary.
The motion was, however, adopted.