Waterbury Democrat., 1900-11-13

Kane, BoyIan, Mahaney, Foley, White Blakeslee, Goss, Cross, Walker, Cal Ian and City Clerk Ryan.
 There was big crowd of specta- tors present, some who had come in to see if the board would approve the recommendation of the board of pub lie safety regarding the appointment of ten new policemen. others were on hand to see what action would be taken on the "Consolidated" petition, and others still dropped in to queer the recommendation of the board of public works in reference to the laying of sidewalks on Brewster street and E2ston avenue and they car Tied their point. George l.. Lilley, and c. A. ColleY, the fathers of consolidation occupied seats in the ante-room and remained until the meeting adjourned, at q pretty late hour, nearly Il o'clock. The absence of Mr Chesson gave the democrats nice working majority, to 6, and for this reason the question of consolida- tion was kept in the background until everything was cleaned up and then 2lr Callan moved to adjourn. The chair was about to put the motion when Alderman Mahaney asked what was the matter with the petition Tor the consolidation of the town and city governments. This brought the
 
 Senting to withdraw his motion to ad- journ, MT Goss offered the following resolutions:
 Whereas, The board of aldermen of the city of Waterbury, believing that the interests of the taxpayers of both the town and city of Waterbury can be better served by a consolidated government, desire to further such legislation as shall best accomplish such consolidation.
 Voted, That q committee of citi zens be appointed by this board to consider the entire question. and to report to this board not later than January 15 next. a draft of bill to be presented to the legislature. which in their judgment will best meet the end in view. and
 Voted, That this board does hereby appoint as such committee, with pow CT to add to their number not exceed ing five other citizens, the following named citizens, viz: F. J. kingsbury, chairman: Michael Guilfoile, D. $. Plume. John Moriarty, H. H. Peck, E. l.. Frisbie. ST. c. P. Goss, David E. Sprague Cornelius Tracy, Daniel E. Fitzpatrick
 The democrats considered this com mittee One-sided and after some ex- change of opinions Alderman Morris offered the following amendment:
 That a committee of fOur two from each side of the chamber. be appoint ed by the president of this board and that this committee retire and bring in the names of five citizens to con- pose a committee to prepare the draft of the bill for the consolidation of the city and town.'
 The amendment was carried. but the chair held that the amendment did not kill the whole of the original mo- tion and that it had nothing to do with any part of it except the names of the committee mentioned therein MT Morris did not see things in this light and stated that his amendment was aimed at MT GossE resolution not any particular part of it any more than at the whole of it and that he believed the amendment killed the original motion altogether. Chairman Hall ruled differently, however, so that the only change the amendment was allowed to make in the original motion was in reference to the method Of appointing committee.
 The chair appointed the following members to nominate a committees: Aldermen Goss, Morris, White and Phelan. The committee retired and re- ported the following nominations: E. G. Kilduff. F. B. Rice, L. F. Burpee J. E. Russell, J. P. Kellogg. When the IepOEteu Dack CIofk Ryan said that he did not believe the mayor would serve on the committed but Mi Goss thought differently, and the re- port was adopted unanimously. This committee is requested to report early in December.
 The next big question was regard ing the recommendation of the board of public works that sidewalks be ordered laid on Brewster street and hn low 1s,Tn December l, 1900. Samuel Lowe ap- peared before the board and stated that he would not lay the walk this year. He claimed that the city rush. ed things there this season and did more harm than good. Aldermen Ma nancy and Cross looked at things from MT Loves standpoint, but MT Goss believed the order q reasonable one and considered it the duty of the board to adopt it. At the re- quest of the board, Commissioner Scully of the board of public works endeayored to throw little light on the question. He said that the board of public works had made 2 special effort to get the streets in question graded on time to lay walks before the bad weather sets in s'These streets he said, lead to Webster school, and the principal and teach ,e,s ess in the building as we'll as the I Parents of the pupils have been after Jhe board about this matter for the past two or three months. Many of lthe property owners in these streets desire to see the work finished as quickly as possible. In fact, I am not aware that anyone is very much op- posed to it except Mir Lowe, and he did not think the work ought to be done anyway. He informed the board of public works that he thought peo- pie who own children should be ob- liged to build sidewalks for them to walk upon if they want them"
 In answer to question from Alder man Blakeslee Mir Lowe said that no one effected by these Improvements had made any move towards putting down their walks. MT Mahaney moved that the law date for putting down the tar walk be changed to read May l, 1901, instead of December i, 1900. The motion was carried.
 One would think that this ought to satisfy MT Lowe, but it seems 1t didn't, for he left the cham Der stating that he would be willing ff, f1y1x 1T,