The daily morning journal and courier., 1896-05-20
THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN
PRESIDENT BEECHER AND SELECT
 MAN LUDINGTON PROTEST.

They Sign Majority Report Which is
 Accepted-The Board Failed to Adopt | Vote Asking for an Opinion From the Town Counsel-May Blast at West Rock.
 Although the contract for the sub | structure of the new Grand avenue drawbridge over the Quinnipiac river has been awarded for more than a week and work on the temporary bridge is progressing rapidly the ma jority of the committee on the part of the town to build the said bridge pre- sented to the board of selectmen last joint committee embodying a formal protest
 | The conclusion of the report reads as | follows:
 We are of the opinion that if the right of Commissioner Johnson to cast | two votes remains unqueStioned, it will work disadvantageously to the town, | as it will be then in the power of the | city to have four votes while the town has three upon committee where both | governments were supposed to be equally represented We recommend | that the town counsel be asked wheth- CT Commissioner Johnson had the right l to vote twice, whether the town agent had the authority to sign said contract whether the town can legally be held liable under said contract. These ques- tions should be settled as they may l aI>icn Ia in aaft yyhiph r11a fn- volve more than the $2,500 represented | in this case"
 Selectman Cunningham said, speaking l to the motion to accept the report MT. l Chairman--It seems to me strange that the committee to come before the board with a report of this kind when, not withstanding a recess was given it upon the last meeting to formulate any 1 protest that they might have seen proper and failed to do so, and in ad- dition to this. especially so when both the town agent and the president of l the board of public works have signed the contracts for the work and also the person to whom the contract was awarded has already begun work. It seems that the time to protest was when the bid was voted for and before either the chairman of the board of public works or the town agent had signed the contract.
 Selectman Farren, who is member of the commission, said that he still thought that the board had no juris- diction and that 1t was a case for the courts to decide.
 MT Bretzfelder had opposed giving the member of the committee power when the first report of the plan to build the bridge was brought in. He believed that such committees should always report to the board. The mem- bers of the committee had asked for power and it had been granted. It was now too late to come to the board with | testimony which admitted the non-use or the misuse of that power. He did not see but one thing to do and that was to abide by the vote of the joint commission.
 President Beecher explained that he did all that he could to prevent the | action of the board from being effec- tive. It was not so much the difference in the cost of the materials and the saving of the $25,000 on the job, as it was the establishment of a precedent which might in time to come be an an- | noyance.
 There was considerable discussion as to who was responsible for the motion | which gave the committee power and it was finally mutually agreed that no one member was responsible for it, though the committee asked to be so instructed.
 The report of the committee, which | e.ir I,1y Ranchnr and Ludington, was accepted. Selectman Farren did not sign the report. The following vote was offered:
 Whereas, The joint commission from the town and city having in charge the erection of the Grand avenue bridge claims to have legally passed a vote awarding the contract for the stone work to one Geary; and
 Whereas, Said vote was not otherwise passed than by the double vote of chair man of said joint commission, he hav- ing voted once in the affirmative and then, having declared that g. tie vote existed, having voted again in the af- f1rmative to dissolve said tie and
 Whereas, In the opinion of some mem- bers of the board and of the great num- Der of the taxpayers of the town there exists doubt as to the legality of said vote and it is believed by many that the same is illegal and unwarranted; <; and
 Whereas, It is for the best interests of the town that it's affairs should be managed according to law, and that a precedent should be established as a guide for future action in similar cases. Voted, That the town counsel be re- quested to give his opinion as to the right of the person claiming to act as chairman of said joint commission to | vote twice upon measure before it; and as to legality of the vote claimed to have been passed by said commits sion; and as to the validity of the con- tract alleged to have been executed pursuant to said vote: and as to whether at the present time by reason of the acts mentioned the town of New Haven is legally bound to said Geary by reason of said contract and voted that said Geary be notified to take no further action, under said all legged contract, until said opinion shall have been rendered to this board.
 The vote was lost by the action of President Beecher, who would not take the privilege.
 When the vote was taken Messrs. Ludington, Beecher and Baldwin voted aye Messrs. Farren, Cunningham and