Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1898-04-28


All the members were present.
The following bills were paid
E. Redfield, April salary .................. $50 O.
Alex Craig, type-writing .................... q
Ben c. Brown, April salary. commencement. 100 o.
s. E. Wilmer . .....-....-..."... so O
Ben G. Brown, sundries, 81
Police salaries for Apri. .........-..... 100 o.
lC. n Bell advertising q
J. H. Wagner, street expenses.......-....... x
H. W. Sharp, {" ..-..........-. II si
A. Marcus. hauling grayel-".................. IS 81
Edw. 81. 81
E. Holster, librarian. % u
F. B. Ridgway, searching. etc................ OK
*Mary R. Burkett, coal, etc., relief~....... 10 81
When the last named bill was read, Mr..
Clymer, member of the Finance Commit
tee. said he had withheld his approval Of
the bill, not to be captious, hut because he
wanted to keep his record straight. Mary
R. BurkeIt, he said. was the wife of Theo
F. Burkett, member of the Finance Com
mittee. What we cannot do by direction
we should not do by indirection we can
not make one hand wash the other. He
did not impugn the motives of Mr.. Bur-
kett nor his wife, but because it was contrary
to law he could noe and would not vote to
pay this bill.
Mr. Hendrickson said if it was an illegal
claim he did not see why Council should
pay it he would like to know.
Mr. Best said he had approved the bill
as a member of the Finance Committee
Early in his Couucilmanic experience he
had objected to paying these bills, but was
told that Mrs. Burkett was carrying ON the
business in her own name. 1t was custo
mary, too, to allow those to hom poor
orders were given, to trade them out with
the business men with whom they traded
regularly.
On motion of Mr. Glading the bill was
ref rred to the Solicitor for his opinion as
to its legality.
In the matter of tas light at Hunter
street bridge, Mr. Andrews reported that
1t was not required because of the proxim-
| ity of fixed lights He also reported the
payment of $50 on paving account by the
estate of the late Joseph Franklin. In the
matter of the improvement of Maple st
along Mr. B. W. Clouds property, Mr.
Andrews recommended payment of 500 to
Mr.. Cloud for damages to his property at
the corner of Hunter and Maple streets
Mr. Clymer said he thought the allow
ance was an I'M ustire to Mr.. Cloud. The
matter had come to his knowledge before
he was a member of Council, and he was of
opinion that ii CounciImen would view the
81 ualion, they would form like opinion.
The sidewalk was cut to the level of the
bottom of the cellar, and house, stables
and carriage houses were not accessible
from Maple street. He then moved that
the sum of $3.50 be substituted for $780,
This was not seconded, then be moved the
matter be deferred for two weeks.
Messrs. Andrews and Burkett said Mr..
Cloud had expressed satisfaction with the
allowance and they supposed the matter
was settled.
Mr.. Cloud called Mr.. Glading to the
chair and gave brief history of the case.
de said the Street committee had made
him an offer of SIS. He had made an es-
innate of the cost of the work, and found
| it would cost him not less than $500. In
| he mean time the city went ahead with
the improvement, and it cost the street
committee $64.05 to pave forty feet it cost
him $40 to make the stables accessible.
When the committee renewed the offer of
SIS, he said he did not want litigation and
wou accept 500, he had previously said
he would be satisfied with $3.50. 5000 had
already been expended, and the work was
not one-fourth done. Mr.. Clymer had
viewed the property, and made the motion
of his own volition.
| Mr.. Clymer said the reason he had
named $3.50 was that he could not name a
sum greater than that acceptable to Mr..
Cloud, tn ugh he felt larger amount was
due.
The matter was deferred till next meet
ing to give Council an opportunity to view
the property.
Mr. Best, in the matter of the electric
| light contracts, reported that after going
over all the data on the subject and sur
rounding circumstances, the committee was
unable to agree, but majority thought
$50 was fair price to pay per arc light,
per year, and recommended. Mr.. Clymer
said he was the minority of the committee,
hence made his report in writing as follows
TO the President, Members of Council Of
the City of Woodbury.:
| GENTLEMEN:
AS member of the Finance Committee,
l beg to report that have not been able
to agree with my colleagues on the Com
mittee concerning the recommendations to
he reported to Council in the matter of
the proposed lighting of the City by the
Woodbury. Electric Light and Power
Com pany.
Briefly stated, | think we should be
furnished With this light as cheaply as is
any other City. have correspondent with
number of parties with view of ascer-
tanning what other Cities might be paying,
and find that the following cities are pay
ing the prices per lamp, per year, named,
and that no moonlight schedule is included
in their contracts but that the lights burn
all night and every night:
Salem, $S2 90
Millville, 100 lights, SO 90
Beverly, IS 90
| :
Gloucester City, 81 90
From unofficial sources | am in
formed that Asbury Park burns its
lamps untilone o'clock eight months
in the year, and all night four months
in the year. and pays, $72 90
Belvidere, sll night service, IS 90
Bloomfield, all night service, 70 90
Clinton, all night service, IS 90
Newton, 20 90
Other cities are paying higher prices
than the above, but to me, that only
emphasizes that they are doing what il 10
my opinion the City of Woodbury. has
been doing, viz. paying too much for what
it is getting and which, under the circum-
stances, can be gotten for much less
| might ada that the prices which have
quoted are, think. without exception, in
places where the motive power is steam.
Another reason why l cannot recon-
mend the approval OF the contract pre-
sented, is that there is no specification as
TO the candle-power Of the lamps which
are to light the City.
4. al. =