Mexico weekly ledger., 1897-06-17

The question of bonding the city for
street improvement came up before
the City Council Monday night for con-
s~ideration, being introduced by the
following motion presented by Coun-
Gilman Glendy:
"Mr. Mayor and City Council of the City
of Merico, Mo-.
81 move that the city attorney be
and is hereby instructed to draft an
ordinance to be submitted to a vote of
the people of Mexico, Mo-, on the
question of issuing twenty $1,000
bonds, the proceeds to be used for the
purpose of street improvement in the
city of Mexico, Mo-, said bonds to be
redeemed one each year for the next
twenty years, the interest on said
bonds to be paid semi-annually and
that the said ordinance shall provide
for the setting aside of one-tenth of
the total revenue of said city for the
payment of said principal and interest
so long as it shall be necessary to Ii
| quidate said indebtedness"
Mr.. Glendy's motion met with a sec-
| ond from MI. Settle.
Mr.. Runkle moved to amend the
motion by adding the sum of $l5, 900
for sewerage, but met with no second.
The members then entered into a
go~od-natured general discussion of
the matter. Mr.. Runkle was the first
to express his views, stating that he
was opposed to bonding the city for
any purpose, but was in favor, IL found
to be practicable, of expanding $4,000
or $1,000 this year out of the general
revenue fund for macadam, the work
to be done by contract and to begin
| July LIST. He stated that the city would
have to borrow a portion of the
money to do this, but it would be bet
ter than bonding the city. Mr.. Runkle
said that if this extra debt was in
Cured it would be only a matter of
time until the city would default in the
payment of some of it's obligations and
this meant a loss of our credit. He
said that the revenue of the city will
not admit of nj contracting this large
debt, and presented q statement of
receipts and expenditures for one
year, beginning January 1, 1896, and
ending January 1, 1897. On January
1, 1896, he said we had a balance on
hand of So, 125.2 "a and the receipts from
all sources during the year were 49,
552. 80, making a total of So, ST.. SO.
The expenditures within that time
were S21, 72O.21, leaving over and
above a necessary outlay only about
1857, and we had more than $4,000 to
begin the year with.
After presenting vario is other facts
and figures, Mr.. Runkle, in conclusion,
said:
"The people of Mexico have sent us
here to legislate for the best interests
Of the city, and if, in our judgment, we
believe it is for the best interests of
| the town to bond it for this improve
| LlOhk wO oHouIa uOhlA bho dAOctASh
to a vote of the people. If we do not
think it ia best to incur this debt then
the matter ought not 60 to the people.
1t should be stopped right here in the
Council"
He said he did not believe even q
majority of the taxpayers favored
bonding the city.
Mr.. Settle championed the cause of
the bond issue in a brief but to the
point argument, stating that in his
opinion there was no question As to
the plan being the correct one to get
a good system of macadamized streets
for about the same amount of money
we are now paying out from year to
year for temporary improvement in
the way of grading, etc. Mr.. Settle
believed a large proportion of the rep
resentative citizens wanted the i'm
provement and should be given an OPP
portunity to express themselves on
the matter. He favored it going to q
vote of the people.
The City Attorney was called upon
to give his views upon the constitu-
tionality of cities of the third class
matchmaking streets at the expense
of a city's general revenue fund
Mr.. CAN'T stated that he had not look
ed up the matter thoroughly, but as
far as he was informed he thought the
city had the right to issue bonds for
that purpose. Mr.. CAN'T further stated
that in his opinion it was a matter to
be decided by the Council whether OF
not it was for the best interests of the
city 60 bond 1t, and II the Council
thought it the right and proper thing,
then it should be submitted to a vote
of the people. Ii not considered fol
the best interests of the city then il
should not 60 to the people.
MI. Board was in favor of postpon-
ing the matter until it could be looked
into more thoroughly.
Mr.. Adams, who was in the Mayor
seat, requested Mr.. Board to take thu
chair, ~whereupon the Mayor pro ten
took the floor and in a sometwhat
lengthy argument advocated bonding
the city for the proposed improve
ment. Mr.. Adams views were clearl,
and explicitly stated and he made I
strong argument from his standpoint
HE covered the ground thoroughly
his main point being that the plar
proposed In the motion of MI. Glend,
was the only feasible one by which tn
city could ave money in street inn
provement. Mr.. Adams thought !
would not embarrass the city's finan
ces to issue the bonds as proposed
the debt could be readily met and tn
Improvement would be permanent
He favored the city doing the worl
under the direction Of theStreet Com
! missioner; did not believe it wise t
let it out by contract; the city coui
do the work cheaper than q contract
or. He favored the matter going t
the people for a decision. A very re
spectacle number, he said, had Ok
pressed themselves in favor Of tn
. movement and this sentiment shout
be given consideration.
Mr. Kant waa in favor of letting tn