The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1895-01-23

| time determine.
| Section 6.-The commissioned shall keep
| full record of all his doings, which Snail De
| open to the inspection of the city council
| and shall make report to said council
| quarterly or as much oftener as ordered OF
| the work completed or in process OF COM
| pletion by him, and said city council shall
| have power to inquire into the action OF
| said commissioner at all times and to re-
quire of him a full explanation of his DO
| ings.
Section THE city council may from
| time to time, subject to the provisions or
| this act, and in accordance with the gener-
! al laws delegate to said commissioner such
additional administrative powers and duties
as the city council may by ordinance deter
mine.
Section 8.-All acts and parts of acts in
consistent herewith are hereby repealed and
all provisions of the charter and all ordi-
nances of said city of Portland inconsistent
herewith are hereby declared imperative
and without effect.
Section 9.-This act shall take effect when
approved.
Attached to this bill was resolution re-
questipg the members of the legislature to
secure it's passage.
Mayor Baxter said he did not think that
this could be called an amendment. 1t was
a new bill.
| Alderman Randall denied this.
| Alderman Thompson thought that it was
| certainly a new bill. Besides, this measure
| presented a system of a single commissioner
which was just the thing they were trying
! to ayoide. The old bill presented the matter
| simply and plainly. 1t had been tried and
| was practicable.
| Alderman Little sustained this view.
! Alderman Randall said the three-headed
| commission was thing of the past as
| shown by the opinions of ex-Mayor Seth
| Low of Brooklyn and ex-Mayor Matthews of
| Boston, The single commissioner and he
| an engineer was the method of solving the
| difficulty most approved at present.
| Alderman MCGOWAN said that as was we'll
| known he had been in favor of this reform
| from its inception. There was difference
| of opinion as to the exact form of the bill.
| There were some reasons for thinking that
single commissioner appointed by the
| mayor would be preferable. AS to The
| method of employing the laborers there was
| this to be said that with the board of public
| works prescribed by the amendment there
| could be no cause of dissatisfaction. In this
| amendment there seemed to be many things
| in line with public thought and sentiment.
| Alderman Thompson thought that IN this
| point the employment of the la Dor was. the
| weak point in the new amendment.
| Mayor Baxter said that he should regard
| the amend ment of Mr.. Randall as new
bill.
| The question was then taken on MI.
| Titles amendment to submit the matter to
the neopIe and it was defeated By the fol-
| lowing vote:
| Yeas-Alderman Thompson and Little.
| Nays-Alderman Dam McGowan Peters
and Randall
| ACKNOWLEDGMENT Smih.
| Then by the same vote the commission
| bill was defeated.
Mayor Baxter then presented Mr.Randall's
amendment as new bill and 1T was adopted
| by the same vote four to two as above.
| When the new draft had been read in the
common council Councilman Pagan moved
that it have a passage in concurrence with
| the upper board. t
| Councilman Nickerson criticized the draft.
1t gave to one man full power to spend the
whole $4,000 OF $4,000 year. 1t seemed to
| him that three men would be far prefera BILE
| to one for such an important duty.
Councilman Pagan explained that the city
council would control the expenditure.
Councilman Kent thought that the bill
was no Improvement over the present
| method.
Councilman Payson said he should like
| time to read the bill carefully and look 1T
| over. There were many things in it which
| he wished to examine. He could not say
now whether he would approve it or not.
|
/ the table.
| This was voted down on a viva voce vote.
| Councilman Nickerson and Kent criticized
| the bill which Messrs. llsley and O'Neil de-
1 Tended.
The vote was then taken on the passage
| of the bill resulting as follows:
/ Yeas-Messrs Ilsley, Haskell, Anderson,
Hayes, johnson, Pagan, Holland, Nc
DoIald, Snow and Steyens-15.
| Nays-Messrs. Kent, Nlokerson, Howell,
| Laughlin, Payson and Nash A..
CASE OF REV. B. f. PRITCHARD.
| The case of Rev. B. T. Pritchard was
brought up before the aldermen. He is at
| present confined in the aims house and it is
| alleged that he is inflicted with false hear
| authorities have felt that it would be better
| 10 have him sent to the asylum, and the
| case was brought up Tuesday evening. MI.
| Pritchard appeared in his own case and
| repr esented that there was no need to send
| him to the asylum. 1t was finally decided
that Mr.. Pritchard should be examined
| again.
REFORMING THE OVERsEERS OF THE
POOR.
Alderman MCGOWAN presented draft of
| bill to be adopted by the legislature to
change the constitution of the board of
overseers of the poor. This bill would make
| the number of oveIseers seven, elected one
| from each ward by the people. The practical
| affect of the bill would be to put the ovel--
| seers on much the same basis that the school
| comhittee is on.
| On Mr.. McGowan's recomme ndation the
| bill was referred to committee.
| ELECTRICAL RAILROAD.
PMaident Wood, of the Portland Railroad
| company, asked leave to use the trolley
| system on the city lines, and the council
| fixed February 18th at 2.30 p. m, as the
| date for public hearing on tie subject at
| CITY building. An advertisement in another
| column gives details.
| MISCELLANEOUS.
! An order was passed directing the city
| Treasurer to uuit claim to John W. Burrowes