The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1900-07-13

tha: al contracts ans. agreements with the city
ar" faithfully k"pt and performed, and IN this
end b" -Fali cause l--al proceedings to be in
stitutci AMI prosecuted against all persons
corporations failing t. fuHu their agreements
with tn" city. And il is Tie duty Of every city
officer. when u shalt come to his knowledge that
any contract with the city r.laJnE Il the bust
ness ~ any office has been violated by the
tracing party. forthwith 10 report the fact to
the Nh or. section % Of Articl. " OF the City
Charter.
According to the Board OF Public I'M
provements. IT is up to Mayor Ziegenhein
to direct the City Counselor to bring suit
against the Kern Incanaescent Gas Light
Company OF New York and Its security. the
National Surety Company of New York.
to recover the whole amount OF the Kern
company's bond for $4,000. which was
given to guarantee the faithful execution
OF it's contract to light the residence dis
tFict Of the city.
The section Of the City Charter defining
the duties of the Mayor quoted above,
was pointed out by a member OF the Board
of Publlc improvements, who said:
Clearly IT Is the duty of the Mayor. hav-
ing been advised 10y a city official of the
failure of any Persons or corporations con-
tracing with the city to keep its agree
ment to cause suit to be Instituted and
prose cuted. The Mayor was advised of such
failure on the part of the Kern Incan-
descent Gas Light Company when the
breach in its lighting contract was declared
1t Is up to him now. and no one else. The
board has nothing more to do with the
matter.
Mayor Ziegenhein was asked what he had
decided to do in the matter.
81 have nothing to say about that" said
the Mayor. His attention being called to
the section of the Charter defining his duty
in cases OF breach OF contract and to the
fact that he has received the proper noti-
fication from the Board OF Public Improve
ments, the Mayor thought hard for mo-
ment. and then said:
We'll. you can say that the suit will be
brought"
Promptly" the Mayor was asked.
YES; promptly. must first consult with
the City Counselor about the matter. OF
course, but there Will be no unnecessary de-
lay about bringing the suit. We want that
so0ooco II can get II. and there Is no
doubt IN my mind that the city Is entitled
to II. As n matter of fact. / understand that
the city will lose $4,000 in the ten years
the new contract is to run by reason of the
failure of the Kern company to live UP to
its agreement. II We recover the full
amount of the bond We will still be out
$4,000 on the change Of contract"
II is expected that there will be n bat
tie royal when the city goes to collect the
amount Of the Kern company's bond. When
the Board of Public Improvements was
threatening TO declare a breach of con-
tract on the part of the Kern company. II
was general talk among members of the
board and city officials interested, that all
the efforts OF the Kern company's repre-
seEtaiives and attorneys seemed to be d.
rected toward finding some loophole OF es-
cape for their security the National Surety
Company. The offer of the Kern company'S
representatives TO waive the legal ten days
notice OF a declaration of breach of contract
seemed to the Board of Public Improve
ments 20 smack of something. other than
generosity. and II was accordingly ignored.
The breach of contract was declared in per-
IeCtly regular and legal manner, and the
board is standing pat on that. and the facts
which called forth the declaration Of a
breach OF contract.
The big question that confronts the city
in the consideration OF the probability of
collecting the amount Of the Kern COM
pgny's bond is whether or not the contract
entered into between the c!ty and the
Kern company was legal and valid. In the
Injunction suit brought against the board.
the city and tn. Kern company, to prevent
the carrying out Of the latter's contract.
the plaintin, James Hogan" alleged that
the Kern company has never been properly
authorized to transact business in this State
and that its contract is. therefore. null and
void.
1t Is more than half expected by the
Board OF Public improvements that the
Kern company will make this its defense in
the suit on It's bond. Bat the board has
never once admitted that II does not con-
ing one. and still contends that the city
should recover on the company's bond.