The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1900-04-21
HAD THE WRONG NUMBER.
,,,xryRE CASE BEFORE THE CITY
COUNCIL DISMISSED.

,,,- prtIdinG Alleged to Be Unsafe
xot oao BroughtOn Street, East, But
An 21s, MIR. Saussy's Contention
s,stoined and the Case Dismissed.
,vbe Complaint to BE Re-entered
,~oiust Mr.. Mcintyre as the Owner
of2lS BrOuGhtOn.
AFTER spending fully an hour yesterday
.e,srnoon in hearing the complaint
,,r,reht against Mr.. ]. w. Mcintyre by
+ba Alavor and fire superintendent on ac-
,,,,rf Of the alleged unsafe condition of
,.s building No. 200 Broughton street,
east on the technical point made by Mr..
7,.1ntvre's counsel, Mr.. j. R. Saussy, Jr.,
,5at Mr.. MCINTYRE was not the owner OF
,ba building at the number mentioned. An
error had been made in making the COM
rI,int in designating the building as in
tha rear of No. go when, as a matter of
fact ii is in the rear of No. 2lS.
This is the case in which Mr.. Saussy
insisted upon his right to be heard at the
1neetne of Council Wednesday night and
In which his persistence in his insistence
resulted in a scene which was terminated
~, tbe Mayor ordering the marshal to re-
move Mr. Saussy from the Council room.
The hearing yesterday afternoon was per-
fe-tlv peaceful and was conducted with
nut anv reference to the event of the pre-
t.ious meeting 1t was chiefly noted for
fb,4 number of technical points sprung by
Ar. oaussy.
Mr. Saussy first questioned the right of
the, Mayor to preside, he being a party to
lhe complaint. City Attorney Adams adj
yised that the Mayor had simply dis
81 hi ltr1 F,1i
nance and hence was not disqualified.
The Mayor overruled Mr.. Saussys objec-
tiops. but the latter insisted that the case
was being heard by body of judges of
which the Mayor was simply the senior
member and the matter would have to be
ruled upon by the entire body Council
promptly confirmed the Mayors ruling in
the matter.
Mr. saussy then inquired as to The po-
sition Of the city attorney, whether he
0as merely acting in an advisory capac-
lty or as the prosecuting attorney, to
which the reply was that the duties of
the city attorney were fixed by ordi-
nance Nh Saussys next objection was
that Council had no jurisdiction. Under
the stale code he said the Police Court
Was given jurisdiction of nuisances MIR.
Adams held that the jurisdiction of the
Police Court was not exclusive, and that
Under the charter the city has the right
10 abate nuisances.
Mr.. Saussy then filed a written list of
objections, covering several other points,
j. which he made the point that Mr.. Nc
Intyre was neither the owner nor agent
Of the premises at 220 Broughton street,
East, and could not be held responsible
i.r the condition of the property there
He also called attention to the fact that
the city code authorizes the Mayor and
The fire chief to inspect and condemn dam
gerous buildings and order their removal
Council having nothing to do with the
natter and expressed the opinion that
his section was unconstitutional.
The Council proceeded to hear the mat
Ter on its merits, however Superintend-
snt Mcguire was put on the stand, and
testified to the dangerous condition of the
property and the length of time which
he matter had been under consideration.
Mr. Saussy drew out in his examination
hat the property in question is not
he only property in the
,lty which is in bad condition
and that there are a number of other
osildines in equally as bad condition. Su-
oerntendeut Mcguire said he had taken
40 steps against other properties mention
ad because no complaint had been made to
aim and he preferred to dispose of the
Mcintyre matter before attempting to pro-
iced further He proposed taking steps
against several other properties if upheld
N this matter, he said.
Tax Assessor Osborne testified that the
property in question was of so little value
/ hat no assessment had been made against
{ by the Board of Tax Assessors.
Mi Saussy moved TO dismiss the case on
.he ground that it had been shown that the
nuisance did not exist in the rear of No.
~ and that his client was not the owner
ana in no way responsible for the condi-
Ion Of that property Mr. Adams sustaine l
aim in this contention and the case was
dismissed. The complaint will Immediately
be re-entered against Mr. Mcintyre on
account of the condition of No. 21S Brough-
on street, east. In the meantime Mr..
adams will look up the acts governing the
authority of Council in such matters.