Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1896-11-11
CITY COUNCIL.
BOARD OF ALDERMEN.

attendance at the meeting last night
During the consideration of the petit
ton to extend Prince street,
MIR. Sweeney wanted to know If
81, 200, the amount recommended by
the joint committees on finance and
streets to do the work, would purchase
the required ground.
Mr.. Burke said that he thought a
great many people who desired the
road would contribute to building it.
The idea of extending the street was to
get away from the railroad which cross
ed King street.
Mr.. Sweeney did not think that the
city should be pu. to the expense OF
spending such large amount on &C.
count Of the railroad 1t looked as II
everything that came here stuck u.s."
He, for one, did not feel disposed to
spend the city's inoney for anything
that was not definitely settled, as was
the case in this instance. He saw no
benefit that the city would derive
from extending the street.
Mr.. Burke said that no appropriation
would be made on the part of the city
until the two adjoining counties settled
the matter, and be would not vote for
an appropriation until such settlement
was made by them.
The report of the joint committee was
finally adopted.
When the communication Of the City
Engineer was received from the lower
board calling Councils attention TO GER
ton public buildings whose construc-
ton does not comply with paragraph Il,
section II, of the building law, was
read, and which had been referred to
to the committee on general laws by the
lower board,
Mr.. Burke could not see what that
committee had to do with it. The City
Engineer had it in his power to enforce
the law, and if the property owners DO
not comply with the law the officer
should report it to the Mayor, where he
thought the communication rightiuliy
belonged. He then moved to reconsider
the action of the board. which had been
to concur in the action of the lower
| board in referring it to the committee
on general laws.
Mr.. Ballenger was of the same
opinion.
Mr.. Burke though. the city engineer
/ should enforce the law. Perhaps he
did not like to take the responsibility
upon himself. but in his opinion he was
the proper officer to enforce the law. 10
this case, however Mr. Burke was
willing that the matter should go before
the com mittee on general laws.
Mr.. Burke latter reading the ordi-
nance providing for the inspection of
| buildings, &C. Withdrew his motion to
reconsider, and the action Of the lower
board was concurred in.
Upon invitation the board proceeded
to the chamber of the lower board TO
participate in the election of Police
Commissioner from the First ward and
four school trustees, and upon their re-
turn adjourned.
COMMON COUNCIL.
Ten members were present when the
board was called to order.
Mr.. Uhler, from the finance commit
tee, referred to bill of D. J. Howell,
for S25 for expert testimony in the case
of Kemper vs.. the City Council. This is
the case in which the city was enjoined
from placing perforated sewer tap on
Fairfax street, between Prince and
garding the bill, but as the committee
had made no report the matter gave
way for other business.
Mr.. Burke, from the committee on
streets, submitted reports on various
matters of public interest which had
been submitted to them. Among them
was one appropriating $1,000, or as
much thereof as may be necessary for
the purpose of extending Prince street
10 the Leesburg pike, the money TO be
expended only when the authorities OF
Alexandria and Fairfax take action in
reference to placing suitable bridge
over Hoof's run.
Mr.. Snowden asked If the court OF
either county had taken action in the
matter.
Mr.. Burke replied that neither had
so far acted in the matter.
Mr.. Strider moved the adoption OF
the report, inasmuch as the money was
not to be expended until the counties
named had acted.
The report was adopted.
ClIlucl dShcu luc NOh'
mittee had agreed to report on reso-
luton allowing w. c. Shock SO addi-
tional compensation for duties perform
ed during the summer.
Mr.. Uhler said the committee bad no
report to make. The matter had been
discussed, but while the committee had
no disposition to keep Mr.. Shock out OF
the $50 asked for, the fact that Coun-
Gil had in the appropriation bill ar
ranged for $500 salary for this official,
whose duties began on the lst of Oc-
tober and ended on the LIST of March,
they were averse to having their esti-
mates disarranged.
Mr.. Strider urged the additional COM
pensation and gave reasons why it
should be allowed-extra work during
the summer, &c.
Mr.. Uhler still antagonized the adop-
ton of the resolution, and said if the
Mayor employed Mr.. Shock during the
summer months it was not obligatory
on Council to pay for the services rem
dered.
Mr.. Strider was disposed to take the
resolution from the committee and let
Council act on it at once, but it being
agreed that the committee would re-
port on it at the next meeting the mat
ter was dropped.
~ II