The record-union., 1896-12-15

to be known as section 411a, which
reads as follows:
There is hereby added to the charter
a new section, to be known and num-
bered as Section Az, to read as fol-
lows:
Section 41h. No demand upon the
City Treasury shall be presented to,
considered or acted upon by the
Board of Trustees, or allowed or ap-
proved by the board, unless it specifles
on its face, in a manner to enable the
Board of Trustees to act intelli-
gently thereon, each several item
composing the same, and the amount
and date thereof; and no action against
the city shall be prosecuted or main
tanned, whether it be for damages or
for other consideration, until the de-
mand therefor, itemized as aforesaid,
shall first have been presented to the
Board of Trustees. and have been re-
jected by said board, and which rejec-
ton must be made and recorded by
the board within sixty days next after
the presentation of the demand. Thls
section shall be the rule of action con-
STRUNG and interpreting this charter
and repeating any part or parts of sec
tions in conflict Herewith.
The section was adopted UNANIMOUSLY.
Bentley moved an amendment to the
proposition with regard to the election
of the Board of Trustees, providing
that the members be nominated from
the wards in which they reside, but be
voted for by the citizens at large. This
was approved by some members, but
the majority opposed it.
A proposition to hear the citizens
outside of the board on behalf of the
new amendments was opposed by De-
vine, who stated that the Board OF
Trustees represented the people more
nearly than the committee did.
Then the matter of the election OF
members of the boards nominated by
the wards by the people at large came
UP again, and the statement was made
that the passage of such amendment
would place the whole of the board in
the hands of the strongest party.
With Mckay in the chair, Leonard
opposed the change.
H. Weinstock addressed the board in
favor of the new proposition, and stated
that each member of the board legis-
lated on behalf of each citizen and Of
lllc NiIOle Guy. Mu1lIclpdl pOlllitS NCi Z
rapidly being divorced from all other
politics. and there was no force in the
objection to the amendment.
Attorney Devlin entered into dis
SertatiOn on the methods adopted by
the American people as opposed to those
in force in older countries, and he op-
posed the proposed change. His main
argument was that by electing members
by wards the Boards of Trustees and of
School Directors the boards would be
certainly mixed in politics, while the
contrary would be the case if the propo-
sition before the board was adopted by
the people.
There was considerable discussion
within the board, but the outsiders who
represented the Board of FreehOlders
We're but feebly heard, as there was a
desire manifested by many of the mem
bers to abide strictly by the result Of
the executive session.
Eventually the propositions were read
section by section Alternative propo-
sition No. /, to make the Mayor simply
the executive officer of the Board of
Trustees, was discussed by Kent, Vein
stock, Woodson, Coleman. Devlin, Pen
nish, Schaw, Leonard and Devine, and
alternative proposition No. =, in order
that the members of the board could un-
derstand the meaning of the two. Kent
was anxious that the question Of perma-
nent, as we'll as temporary, appoint
ments should be submitted to the peo-
pie SO that either the Mayor or the
Board of Trustees should make all ap-
pointments absolutely. He insisted in
having the matter interjeoted into these
propositions instead of later
Devlin suggested that the sections be
amended so as to give either the Mayor
or the board control of the general busi-
ness of the city, as we'll as the specific
matters referred to in the sections. With
this change the propositions were or
dered submitted to the people.
On proposition No. 3, which provided
for the publication of the ordinances,
which had been voted down in executive
session, J. A. Woodson made strong
plea for the publication of the ordi-
nances on the ground that the people
had a right to know the laws that were
passed. and stated that in all old coun-
tries the laws had to be posted in some
public place, and 1t was shame to ask
the people to obey laws that they had no
opportunity to be made aware of. The
section was eliminated, ToZer and Pen
nish voting against its elimination
Proposition No. f. giving the Mayor
power to revoke any license, was voted
down.
Proposition No. ), making the Presi-
dent of the board Mayor in the absence
or disability of the Mayor, was ordered
submitted TO the people
Proposition No. 6, providing for two
cent tax for public celebrations, out OF
which $4,000 should be expended on the
Fourth of July, was unanimously or
dered submitted.
Proposition No. {, providing for the
| election of the Board of Education by
| the people at large, one member to re-
| side in each ward and in such manner as
| to have half of the members hold over,
! was adopted.
Proposition No. s, increasing the COM
pensation of the members of the Board
of Trustees, was also adopted.
Proposition No. 8, increasing the
membership Of the Board of Trustees by
| the addition of two members at large,
| was eliminated by vote of to :.
Two new alternative propositions
We're offered by Attorney Devln and
moved by Kent. The first providing
| that all officers of the city not other
wise provided for by law, except the
| Mayors clerk, shall be appointed by
| the Board of Trustees, and the other
| that all officers not otherwise provided
| for. except the President OF the Board of
| Trustees and the City Clerk, shall be
appointed by the Mayor. Kent and De-
| vine fought to have the Corporation
Counsel excepted. and Pennish said IL