The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-12-14
SINKING FUND MEASURE
QUESTION As TO WHETHER CITY
WILL TRY TO REVIVE III.
Amendments to the Barrett Law. Per-
tanning 10 Bonds, Being Com
sidered.

Controller johnson discussed with re-
porter yesterday phases of city business that
might need legislation in the coming session
of the General Assembly. Two years ago
Mr.. Johnson favored the passage of an act
providing for the creation of a sinking fund
to pay off the bonded debt as it natures in
the future. After extended research in
Guiding examinations of laws of other large
cities, a bill was prepared and introduced in
tho legislature. 1t passed the House but
failed in the Senate. MIR. Johnson is debat-
ing whether it ought to be revived a few
days ago G. j. Murphy of Evansville. pres
ident of the State Board of Commerce and
treasurer of the commission that has been
formed for the reformation of county and
township business, called on Controller john
son for information concerning the sinking
fund bill Mr.. Murphy was very much in
terefted in having a new charter prepared
for Evansville, and his efforts in that direc-
ton assisted largely in securing it. He and
number of attorneys are interested in pre-
pairing a sinking-fund bill that will apply to
cities of the rank of Evansville. lie asked
for a copy of the bill Mr.. Johnson had pre-
pared for Indianapolis two years ago. MIR.
johnson had nothing but the original draft.
This he handed over to Mr.. Murphy. Yes
terday he received letter from Mr.. Murphy
stating that it had been of material aid to
the committee and that in few days he
would forward the controller a copy of the
committees bill.
Another matter that Mr. Johnson is con-
sidering is the advisability of amending the
Barrett law which permits property owners
to pay Improvement assessments in ten am
nua instruments. Under one provision or
the law the property owners may pay or the
entire lien at their option after one year has
Gl9nSp6 notice.
optional feature frequently makes 1T difhcult
to dispose of the bonds, investors not caring
to place their money in securities that may
run out at any indefinite period after eight
cen months. 1t has been suggested to MIR.
Johnson that by removing this optional tca-
tuTe and making the bonds run for a definite
period there would be a better opportunity
might even be disposed of at not to exceed
. per cent. interest. and perhaps as low as 4
per cent. The objection suggested to this by
Deputy City Attorney Bell yesterday wa 8
that the optional feature was valuable, us 1t
often became necessary for the property
owner to remove the incumbrance-tor in
stance, If he desired to obtain mortgage
sible to have some provision by which liens
might be waived, or some definite period pro-
vided, after which the option to pay oil the
entire amount might be eXercised-say after
three. six and nine years. or some other
definite period. He said that if investors
knew they might rely on their money re-
naming invested for given periods, say
difficulty in disposing of the bonds No de-
termination has been reached by the con-
troler, but he has been giving consideration
to suggestions that have been made.