Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1895-11-13

the adoption of the report of the COM
mittee on streets favoring the narrow
ing ofthe roadway of Wolfe street, and
the matter went over.
a report of the committee on streets
favoring the expenditure of $1,000 for
the purchase of oyster shells to be
placed on the unpaved streets of the
city was favored by Messrs. McCuen
and Fannon. who thought something
should be done with such thorough
fares.
The report, on motion of Mr.. Mush-
bach, was laid on the table.
Mr.. Strider presented report from
the committee on public property fay-
oripg the use of part of the old court
house lot for an engine house for the
city. The report was accompanied by
an opinion of the Corporation Attor-
ney, who holds that the city has an
equal right with the county to the use
OF the property.
Mr.. Strider said the Council commit
tee had gotten but little satisfaction
from the county Supervisors in refer
ence to division of the property, and
he was in favor of action so as to give
the county an opportunity to stop the
city by Injunction from occupying q
part of the court house lot; he was op-
posed to letting the matter remsin at q
standstill; something should be done.
Mr.. Greene was in favor of having the
matter settled by the courts.
Mr.. Cation said that the last Council
had appointed committee to consider
the matter, which committee and the
county Supervisors had recommended
that the property be sold and the pro-
ceeds divided; Council had failed to act
on that report.
Capt. Mushbach offered as substi-
tute for Mr.. Strider's report PROPOSE
ton to bring suit for partition of the
property and it was carried.
When a resolution providing for the
printing of all matters connected with
the city government in both the city
papers came in from the Aldermen re-
ferred to the finance committee,
Mr.. Cation opposed the reference. He
said were the question, Which paper
shall be the organ of the city? put to
him he would prefer the GAZETTE.
There were associations connected with
it during its long history which would
prompt this. The resolution, however,
presented no such issue, but merely
provided for the printing of the pro-
ceedings of Council and other matters
in connection with the city government
in both the Alexandria papers. Some,
he said, took one paper, and some the
other; and the readers of both should
b, kept posted in the doings of the city
fathers. In many other communities
two papers are employed to do the pub.
C printing.
Mr.. Mushbach asked if a contract
with the GAZETTE was in existence,
an if so was it perpetual.
Or. Uhler said he had always favor
cd the use of but one paper. II the SER
vie rendered by the GAZETTE during
the past one hundred years was unsatis-
factory, Council could annul the con-
tract at any time. He saw no reason
for the services Of two papers, costing
1000. when the work could be done
Tor $500 or less. Councilmen were not
elected to vote away the peoples money
10 Substituting papers. He would vote
to publish the proceedings in one
paper, but not in two. Mr.. Uhler said
some had questioned the fact that o
contract for the public printing existed
with the GAZETTE, and he cited Incl
dents as far back as war times to show
there is. He produced data where city
officials and the editor of the GAZETTE
had signed papers showing this twenty
wears ago, besides the fact that the late
Robert Bell nearly thirty years ago
moved in the Board of Aldermen that
the contract between the publishers Of
the GAZETTE and the city authorities
be extended was sufficient proof of its
existence.
MIR. Cation wanted the GAZETTE to
retain the work. The resolution be-
fore Council would in no wise affect it.
He said he had no pecuniary interest
in either paper, but believed that the
readers OF both should be kept inform
ed of the acts of Council.
Mr.. Snowden (Mr. Burke in the
chair) reiterated what he had said on
former occasion when the same matter
was before Council-that- he did not
own brick nor type in the GAZETTE
property, but received salary as 9TH
ers employed on the paper. His OBJ
.ect, however, in taking the floor was
to show that a contract did exist be.
tween the paper represented by him
and the City Council, and if it was not
in the Auditors Office it should be. He
was opposed to publishing the proceed
ings of Council officially in more than
one paper, as it would entail useless
expense, and said if Council so desired
the contract between the GAZETTE and
the city could be annulled at any time.
The publisher received about enough
for the service in year to pay for re-
porting and putting it in type; there
was nothing very remunerative about
it. But there was no more reason why a
city should use two papers than there
would be for two clerks and two rec
ords. The government had but one
official paper, the State one and there
was no reason why this city should
have more than one. Most people |
read the local account of the proceed.
ings of Council, which was published |
free by all papers, and very few read
The official proceedings.
Mr.. Mushbach, who had asked some
questions while the debate was in pro-
gress, said being vice president of the
Times newspaper he would refrain
rom saying anything on the subject.
Mr.. Cation had stated the matter clear
" and succinctly.
A vote was finally taken on Mr.. Ca.