The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1897-08-03

Has the commissioner of public works
any authority for disposing of any
property belonging to the city in his de-
par TIN ent?
Answer am not aware of any statute
or ordinance which authorizes the COM
missioner of public works to dispose of
any property belonging to the city in his
department.. Therefore I answer the
second interrogative in the negative
Have all ordinances relating to streets
passed prior to March s, 1895 been re-
pealed?
Answer-By act Of the legislature ap-
proved March s, 1895, entitled IAN act to
establish commission of public works
in the city of Portland" it is provided in
sistent Herewith are hereby repealed and
all provisions of the charter and all ordi-
nances of said city of Portland inconsist-
ent herewith are hereby repealed and de-
clared imperative and without effect. So
that it will be plainly seen that all ordi-
nances of the city relating to streets
passed prior to March s, 1895, are not
affected by the act establishing said COM
mission of public works in the city of
Portland, except so far as they are incon-
sistent with the provisions of said acts.
This think answers the third interroga-
tory.
The above questions and answers were
in writing and answered in writing. In
addition Alderman Rounds wished to
add another question, whether the COM
missioner of public works was above the
city government in authority or vice
versa. The specific point was whether
the commission might disregard the order
of the city government and could pave a
street without an order.
The city solicitor said he wished to
have the question in writing and also
would like to have time to investigate.
There arose considerable discussion on
these points among the committee, it be.
ing held that if the city government
should order more work done than the
commissioner could do he would have to
disregard some of it. 1t was also stated
that the only street paved without order
were being laid by authority of the
Alderman Leighton had been answer
ing objections raised by Mr.. Rounds,
when the latter turned fiercely on him
and asked him how he knew SO much
city government.
II suppose it is because keep posted, :"
said Mr.. Leighton.
Eyes, because you are after all the work
for Wards six and seven,'' retorted Mr..
Rounds.
81 think it can be easily shown that
more work has been done east of Brown
street than west of it in the last three
years." replied Mr.. Leighton, and Alder
man Mcdonald called attention to the
fact that Cross, Market and Center streets
had recently been paved.
Then there was something said about
the jurisdiction of the investigating COM
mittee, but Alderman Leighton begged
that this be not done, as it was important
that the allegations made against the
commissioner of public works be thor
oughly sifted. =
Then there was talk about some granite
blocks bought by the street department.
Mr.. Rounds siad that a man in Yarmouth
held that they could be bought cheaper
than the city had bought them. But
Alderman Mcdonald and Leighton held
that the man in Yarmouth had said he
could give different kind of blocks at a
little lower price, but that the city was
getting the kind it was using at low
price.
Mr.. Rounds requested that at the next
meeting every teamster and other en-
ployes of the street department be sum-
moned to be present. All agreed to this
Several questions were then propounded
to the city solicitor regarding the authori-
ty of the investigating committee, and
the right of the city government to in
yestigate city officials.
The meeting adjourned subject to the
call of Chairman Rounds. 4 He is going
away for a trip of few days and
Alderman Leighton is going to Vermont
SO that it is probable that the next meet
ing will not be before Friday or Satur-
day.