The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-09-17

Select Council was agitated last night
over the resolution ordering the ten
dollars To I've rcmittcd to Marin Dock
elty which was imposed on him by
Alderman Delavan for AN alleged vio-
ldtion of the city ordinance prohibiting
fast driving over the streets. II was
discussed and cusscd on the quiet and
debated on and argued over for the
greater Part OF The me ting and was
finally left undisposed Of
For a trivial matter this resolution
claims an unique record in the history
Of councils. Dockorty, who is e'ebrated
for his fondnoss for speedy horses, was
arrested by Patrolman Ruddy several
months ago on a complain of fast
driving OH Belmont street, was taken
before Alderman Delavan of the sixth
ward and fined $40. Complaints had
been made one after the other about
reckless driving over this thorough
fare. DoCkerty was the first to be ar
rested and as an example a heavy fine
was imposed i'm his case. DOCkerty
protested against the penalty. insisting
that he was not driving beyond the or
dinarN speed, and when the alderman
refused to reverse himself the former
sought the offices of his friends among
the councilmen and had a resolution
introduced into select council which
directed the fine to be romittcd. 1t was
laughed at by all hut the friends of
nocker;y, on the ground that councils
had no jurisdiction whatever 1t passed
select council, however and when it
came up in common council it was
amended. on the advise of the city
solicitor, so as to direct the latter to
h,, h, he
to the city treasurer and then re-
mitted to Dockerty This the city
solicitor averred councils had author
ity to direct.
1t was in the amended form that it
came before select council last night
and percipitatcd the mild storm that
passed over without the matter being
disposed of.
So soon as it was before the house,
Mr.. Thompson, who represents the
ward In which Alderman DelaVan re-
sides and who has sustained the ac-
ton of the justice throughout, was
on his feet with a motion To lay the
amended resolution on the table. There
was immediate objection on the part
of Mr.. Mannion who bothered the roso.
luton and who led the friendly feeling
that existed i'm councils for DOCkerty
To cnlightcn the members, city SOlici'
tor stuart, who was present, was
sought for his opinion, He declared
that while councils had no jurisdiction
over the aldermen of the city, it haC
the right after the fine was turned
over to the city to remit the same
Dockerty or any one else if ii 81
elected, The resolution, ne said wa
drawn by him on the request of
member OF committee of common coun
.eil,. ...,
Al this juncturc and when the mem
hers began 10 wax warm over the mer
Its of the controversy city Controlle
Wheeler. who also happened to b
present. broke into the discussion wit
! scoring for aldermen who fail I
turn into the city treasury the fine
hat they collect from time to time.
s the practice, he declared, to colleC
many in the way of fines and then for
get 10 turn them into the city treasur,
In his FIVE years experience in oftic,
Mr.. Wheeler continued, he knew of onl
two or three instances-not more tha
three where money collected as fine
had been handed over TO the city treas
urer each month as required by law
As the case under discussion, the con
troller said he saw the receipts whic
Dockerty had; IL read as being a
acknowledgment of money received
payment of a fine imposed for "Violi
ton of a city ordnance In the ligl
" this the money belonged to Il
city Mr.. Wheeler concluded, and
should he turned into the treasur
Though the alderman claimed Dockert
was fined under the state law, the r.
ceipt given the latter plainly indicate
1t was f9r a city ordinance violation,
Mr.. Thompson, when the controll
finished, further defended the action
The alderman and took another ST
against councils remitting the fine,
declaring that II was beyond the juri
diction of councils. 1t was also, he b