Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-01-18

ger So the proposition was accepted
upon the conditions.
The question now arises, was the mo-
ton carried by q vote OF four councils
men and the mayor sufficient to bind the
.city and sufficient to complete the con-
tract? Section 6s3 OF the code reads:
6 No resolution or ordinance for any
of the purposes hereinafter set forth
shall be adopted without the concur
renee OF a majority of the whole mum
her of members elected to the council,
towit: To pass or adopt any resolution
or order to enter into a contract.
The motion made by Mr.. Harris was
without question a norder to enter into
a contract on conditions that changes
were made satisfactory to the special
sewage committee. A majority of nine
members composing council in cities
of the second class is five, and five
mem bers of The council voted for the
motion.
This, without doubt, then completed
the contract as soon as the changes
spoken of We're made to the satisfaction
of the special sewage committee, So
far as the legal question is concerned
there can be no question that the com
tract was complete by this action
The special sewage committee ac-
cepted this view of the matter and
spent several days investigating the
contract and endeavoring TO secure a
lower price. They consulted with their
Isengineer and on Nov. 9 the st. Louis
company made their proposition def
Mite and explicit as to all material and
l:mittee. and the proposition was duly
accepted by the special sewage commit
tee signed by the mayor and attested
4 by the city clerk.
If the record in this matter. the law
regarding councils and contracts, and
1.-THE acceptance and signing of the prop
ling contract, ii seems to me it would be
that would be legal and binding
On Nov. l reported to the council
4 that the proposition of the st. Loui.
utes being as follows: Mayor Pierce o.
reported the proposition of the st. Loui!
Electrical Supply Company had beer
1 accepted by the committee
At this meeting there was no ques
ton as to legality OF contract raised
il.but Mr.. kreutzer and other councilmer
EXPIRE sed desire to have a specifi,
contract placed before the council. TIL,
committee at once asked the ST. Loui
company for contract covering al
A points. and on Dec. 3 the contract wa.
8Iisubmitted to the council but its consid
i GRAFTON was made. impossible by an i'm
In, Il
several of the councilmen having eX
4 pressed themaelvesin favor of a iiiecti,
connected plant. on request of Mr.. Ben
son and With the idea of giving al
Imembersg of the councilsa chance TO con
y slider the advisaDility of a directly con
Injected plant, called another meeting
4 but was unable to- get "a quorum
+ AT the last meeting of the council
4 latter the proposition of the ST Lo1j
4 company had been S,epal,v acce,,t,s,
A thus making a contract. a resolution j
Z introduced, asking that the contract b
4 submitted to attorneys for a legal opin
i ion. This think is uncaIled for. be
y scauae the contract 10 not questioned b
4 any one who has not an interest in on
|posing any action that would look Xix
eAiS W Ss'liiill5 III WIFI III
local lighting company. The mover
the resolution say that the city attol
ney's opinion is that the contract is Il
gal. and certainly we should take h
: |sopinion If we take any legal advice.
There certainly is some other obiet
, behind the antagonism to this contrae
THAN a mere difference of opinion. Tn
same councilmen who are 80 solicitou
to use their words of the interest
their constituents did not say one wor
while the water works committee sper
several times the amount of money II
7 VOWED IN this transaction, and did ne
Ionce lay the question Of expenditure bt
fore the council after the first resolu
! ton granting them power was passet
IN saving this, i do not find fault wit
he water works committee bur simpl
point out the Inconsistency of the az
tons of the council in the two maj
ters
40 not care to go into the merits {
(. ehe dii1erent propositions of furnishin
power 70 the pumping station. fe'
mat me contract With the st. Lou
!. company ls regal ana binding and
\ would 60 no good Whatever to spen
: 'tle va NS-payers money for opinion
I. sssl'en we can as individuals secure a
: we OPINIONS we desire FOR the asking.
! y there Was any possible question 9
2 10 liie contract soeins binding and tha
!. 3 y az no. taxing the rlsnt course IN rs
: turning ehls resolution TO you withol
my apploNai' al doubt would be dis