Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-12-24
Ordinance Designed to Sup-
press immoral Exhibitions.
|AMENDATORY MEASURE PASSED
Was Adopted by City Council
Thursday Evening.


phpJott api - aoh- pu' tpb, WY SoubCil
last Thursday unanimously adopted an
amendatory ordinance designad to sup
press immoral theatrical exhibitions.
Three weeks ago, several months after its
introduction, City Council defeated a
proposed ordinance designed for the
purpose mentioned; but at its meet
ing two weeks ago showed spirit
more favorable to the desirad OBJ ject.
At that meeting an amendatory ordi-
nance proposed by Mr.. McNulty was
before Council, but was laid over. And
last week it came before the city
fathers for final consideration. In
the opinion of some, MIR. McNulty's
amendatury ordinance did not go far
enough in that 1t included the actor,
and did not .nention the manager, as
liable to fino for immoral words or
actions. To secure more stringent
law, Mr.. Robertson offered substitute
covering Mr.. McNulty's ordinance and
bringing in the owner, manager or
lessee of the place of public amusement
as liable. Other propositions were also
before Council, which, after defeating
Mr.. Robertson's' substitute, finally
adopted an mendment which in most
points was exactly what Mr.. Robert
sonahad proposed.
the session was much longer than
usual and much more interesting. All
the members of Council were in their
seats except Mr.. O'Neill. In addition
there were present William S. Prickett,
attorney for the Law and Order Society !;
ex-City Solicitor Charles NJ. Curtis,
Archdeacon George G. Hall, rector Of
st. Johns Church George W. Todd
and DIR. j. M. Winner, who were de.
nj nj fha nf of 40
amendment. Mr.. McNulty's proposed
amendment came up under unfinished
business for Its third reading, and was
duly read by Clerk Morrison. There
upon Mr.. McNulty moved that that be
known as the third reading. This
motion was seconded. Messrs. Robert
son and Oberly both stood up for recog-
milton by the chair, who recognized
Mr.. Robertson. The member from tbe
Fifth ward submitted proposed sub
stitute to the proposed amendatory Or
dinance and he moved to strike out all
after the enacting clause and insert In
lieu thereof the substitute he offered.
The substitute included Mr.. McNulty's
ordinance and vert farther SO as to
make owner, manager or lessee liable.
1t also increased the fine from 80 cents
to IS as the lowest limit, and $40 to s25
as the highest limit. Mr.. Watson
seconded the amendment. wbereupon
Mr.. McNulty arose to point of order.
He declared that first it had been
offered as an amendment and second as
substitute. Mr.. Robertson replied
that he offered it as substitute, and
thut Mr.. Watson had made mistake
in calling ii an amendment. Mr.. Fisher
seconded the substitute to clear that
UP, and President Baylis announced
the motion to adopt the substitute.
Mr. McNulty here stated that
he objected to the way the
what it covered and he did
not want to be driven against it.
His objection WAS that the substitute
struck out his amendatory ordinances
and yet used the very words he had
used. He held that the only new part
was that beyond the portion referred
10. and announced that he favored it.
lie objected also, however, that the
fine OF SIS was too high for some cases
under the original ordinance which
covers numerous nuisances.
Mr. Robeitso in reply to Mr. Me-
Nulty disclaimed any intention to
offend him. Many of the speakers
constituents had asked him to bring
in the manager. In order not to offend
Mr.. McNulty he had included MIR.
McNulty's amendment. lie held that
the first amendment tMr. McNulty's;
was but pretext, which accomplished
nothing. Under it the actor might
skip town and nothing could be done.
lie favored making the manager re-
spnnsible. AS to the fine, so cents
was no object and would be paid gladly.
Mr.. Robertson went on to say that he
thought something should be done in
order that the morals oil the community
be upheld. The authorities have
claimed that they have no law. People
have waited on the chief of police and
given him to understand that there is
no law on the matter. The speaker
declared that the only people who are
afraid of the proposed law are those
who wish to break it.
Mr.. Oberly announced that he had
an amendment which he would like to
present when in order.
Mr. McNulty again raised his
objection to the way the sub
stitute was presented and wanted
credit given to whom due for
tho onening portion. Mr.. Robert
son replied that he did not wish to as
sumo any credit, and again declared
that he had not meant to offend. lie
thought Mr.. McNuty ought to accept
his explanation.
Mr.. Meaney said that there had been
a good deal Of unnecessary talk. lie
had an amendment to PROPOSE lie
deprecated the Personalities which had
heen heard. His position was fully
known. He could not agree with some
portions and what he hal to propose
would, he thought, cover the ground.
Mr.. Staats made the suggestion to
have separate ordinance to cover the
matter desired. Council might amend
the section, as Mr.. McNulty proposed.
and prepare an ordinance to reach ex-
acrly what was sought, something to
govern the am easements of the city Of
Win ngton. Then the question whether
1t will stand before the courts would
come up.
Mr. Robertson agreed TO make tho
lower fine \limit 81 instead of 50, SO
that the fines would range from 81 to
so. As to Mr.. Staats' proposition to
have separate ordinance he referred
< TO the defeat OF the proposed ordinance
By Council two weeks ago.
a A vote was taken on the substitute
4 and it was defeared. blessrs. Zebley,
\ Robertson. Watson and Fisher voted
for it; Messrs. McNulty, Oberly.
9, Meauey. Smith, Leary anu Stevenson
lvoted against it.
Mr. Staats remained seated while
n. DO. III.