The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-06-04
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,
A Veto Message on the Btu
minouS Rock ReSoIu-
tons.
BUT IT IS PLACED ON FILE
The Mayor, However, Says He viii
Not Sign Any Bills Contracted
Under 1t.

At the meeting of the Board of Super
Visors yesterday Mayor Sutro submitted
the following communication, which is in
the nature of veto of the resolution passed
at the preceding meeting creating a mo-
nopoly of the bituminous-rock business in
favor of Santa Cruz mines and the South
ern Pacific Railroad Company:
To the Honorable the Board of Supervisors of
the City and County of San Francisco, Cdl.-GEN-
TLEMES: Your honorable body on May 20,
1895, passed order No. 2S71 relating to specif-
To this proposed legislative order there are
some valid objections and they are the same
were given April 8, 1895, in my preceding
veto on this matter, and are repeated here, as
follows:
First-That it would practically exclude the
shipment OF bitumen rock by vessels, as 1t has
been shown that the rock thus shipped in the
transit often melts into one mass and would
have to be mined out of the ship again, except
ii is first melted into sacks, which the ordl-
nance in fact prohibits.
Second-That for the reason just stated many
mines at distance would thereby be excluded
from competition on account OF the higher
rates Of freight charged by the railroads.
Third-It would ubstantially create mo-
nopoly in favor of the Santa Cruz mines, which
are located nearest to San Francisco, and also
a monopoly in the transportation thereof In
favor of the Southern Pacific of Kentucky.
Fourth--It Will be observed that this present
ordinance contains clause as follows: "The
coarse sand and pebbles and free from clay and
vegetable matter"
This would prohibit the further use OF much
bituminous rock for street pavements. as little
exists free from some OF the material emu
merated.
sent to the order because its operation would
be to monopoliZe the bitumen in its mining,
transit and laying, and thus increase the bur-
den of the property-owner and raise the munich
pal tax levy
The above is written on the assumption that
the order has come regulerly before me for my
approval.
has tried to pass this order without regarding
the Mayor as part of the laW-making power
OF this municipality.
usual form and appears on its face as an
amendment of general order, this body, evad-
ing the authority OF section bS OF the consoll-
dation act, has sought to pass this order as q
resolution.
In my judgment this is an illegal method.
1t viii be recollected that when this order
was before me short time ago 1t was then
thoroughly argued and considered.
1t was then vetoed because it was antag-
onistic to the municipality and the taxpayers
That veto was sustained.
Now the present order is In substance the
same as the one vetoed; therefore, apparently
to avoid a new veto, the resolution method is
1t is the duty of the Mayor to jealousy guard
his official prerogatives.
They are granted for the protection of the
public.
1t is my intention to perform every duty as
signed me by law in the matter of street work.
In this regard my official rights must be re-
spected.
If they are disregarded, then there will be
found way to protect the City and the pub
lie. Notice is hereby given that when any
work is done under these specifications, SO
passed by resolution, and the assessment there
for shall come to me as Mayor for my approval,
the same shall be withheld as I believe these
specifications cannot be passed as mere reso-
luton. Very respectfully,
ADoLPH sUTRo, Mayor.
Dated, May %, 1895.
When the clerk had ceased reading
of the message Supervisor Hughes
rose and very quietly asked if the resolu-
ton referred to had ever been submitted to
the Mayor for his approval.
The Mayor replied that it had not.
"Then," said Mr.. Hughes, II move that
this communication be placed on file"
Mr.. Dimond jumped to the defense. ~
hold, your Honor, that this motion is out
of order" he said; ait is illegal. The ma
jority of this board, | have been prone to
believe, has been given to acting in ignor-
ance of the law rather than in defiance of
it. But 1 am determined it shall plead
ignorance no longer. l will, therefore,
call their attention to section 6S of the con-
solidation act, the latter part of which,
after detailing the duty of the Mayor in re-
gard to the acts of members, reads:
Every ordinance or resolution of the Board
of Supervisors providing for any specific i'm
provement, the granting of any privilege, or
Involving the lease or other appropriation of
public property, or the expenditure of public
moneys Except for sums less than $500, or
laying tax or assessment, and every ordinance
or resolution imposing new duty or penalty
shall, after its Introduction in the board, be
published, with the ayes and noes, in some
city daily paper at least five successive days be-
fore final action by the board upon the same,
and every such action after the same shall pass
the board shall, before it takes effect, be pre-
sented to the president OF the board for his ap-
proval.
"Now this states the case clearly" con-
tinued Mr.. Dimond. IF this resolution
was not submitted for the Mayors ap-
proval it should have been. 1t is an order
Involving the outlay of public money.
The majority of this board cannot be a
law unto itself. They must abide by the
law as it is written, and | hold that the
motion TO place on file is out of order"
Hughes called for a ruling on his motion.
Mayor Sutro, on account of his defective
hearing, had scarcely caught the drift of
Mr.. Dimond's remarks, and there was
quite a little pause, during which the
Mayors COACH Assistant Clerk Brown,
explained the parliamentary situation.
II shall rule" said the Mayor finally,