The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-01-15
BRILL BRINGS SUIT.
Says the City Is Indebted to Him for
Working on Sunday-The Claim
Is Approved.

John Prill, formerly employed by
the city as one of the foremen in the
street cleaning department, brought
a civil action before Alderman George
F. Kellow, of the Fourteenth ward,
yesterday afternoon, to recover $29.2o
which Brill says is owing to him for
labor done. The question at issue is:
Did John Brill work Sundays?
Street Commissioner A. Il. Dunning,
who was made defendant m the suit,
thinks that Brill did not work Sun
days. So firmly was the street COM
missioner in his opinion that he struck
off the Sunday accounts in the time
bill sent in by Brill. But the street
commissioner possibly made a mis-
take, although City Solicitor McGinley
does not think so. Nevertheless, judg-
ment was awarded to Brill for the full
amount at the hearing yesterday.
Alderman Kcllow, however, qualified
his decision with the remark. wen
leave the higher courts to look into
the case" An appeal will be taken.
AS the story was told before Alder
man Kellow Brill was employed to look
after gang of men at $2.25 per day.
He sent in his time accounts for June
and July including eight Of the nine
Sundays upon which he worked. The
street commissioner passed upon the
bills. He stated yesterday that he did
not detect the matter and in due time
Brill was paid for the Sundays.
Street Commissioner Dunning, in fact,
was not the original discoverer of the
mistake" 1t was City Clerk Martin
IIavelle who, when Brill sent in his
account for August, noticed that the
five Sundays were counted and the
matter was then called to the atten-
ton of the street commissioner. Mr..
Dunning said the time was excessive
and the FIVE Sundays were wiped Off
the bill.
Street Commissioner Dunning did
more than this. He looked over Brill
accounts for June and July and dis
covered that for eight Of the nine Sun
days in these months Brill had been
paid This, the street commissioner
pronounced an error which had es-
capped his notice To rectify it the
street commissioner deducted thirteen
days time from Brilrs August ac-
count and when Brill made his ap-
pearance Oh pay day he found $2925
less than what he expected to re-
ceive.
Then he brought the civil action. At
| the hearing Assistant City Solicitor NJ.
| J. Walsh represented the city. Brill
| handled his own case. In his testi-
mony he briefly stated he worked thr-
| teen days for the city for which he
wanted pay On examination he said
| he didn't know whether or not he
worked Sundays in the month of May,
| neither did he know when he began to
get city pay He was pressed by At
torney Walsh to say something about
| May. "It will bring up fond recollec-
| tions," suggested the attorney. Eyes, -
remarked Brill, "recollections that l
don't care to revive"
"How many SUNDAYS did you work
in June@"
How many are there" retorted
| ELL. Il counted them all so that !
could make no mistake"
In this manner the examination was
| carried on, Brill skirting about in a
| somewhat clever fashion. When asked
whether he was authorized to work
| Sundays Brill admitted that he had
no special orders. His time for June
and July We're passed and he took this
| as an indication that he should con-
| tlnue working. He stated his Sunday
work consisted of looking for barrels
| and nuisances.
Commissioner Dunning on the stand
stated that he never authorized Brill to
work on Sundays. He had conferred
with the city solicitor on the matter
and was told that Brll's present claim
wouldn't stand. He wondered why
Brill had missed counting all the Sun
days in July. He left one out. The
hearing was somewhat exciting
| throughout