Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-03-11

would impose hardship upon those coming
under the city penalties
This he explained by saying that after
an offender has been tried under the ordi-
nance and punished he can be indicted by
the grand jury and punished in the corpora
ton court for the same onense, as the ordi-
nance does not impose the same conditions
as the state law"
Cited Thorn Case.
He cited the Thorn case, which went to
the court of appeals from the corporation
court Of Richmond in 1873. as one furnish
ing a parallel. The city, Of Richmond, he
said, having increased It'll fine penalty for
the violation Of the Sunday law to agree
with the fine imposed BY the statute failed
to make the time the same, as that Of the
state. Is
Thorn was tried under, the ordinance for
selling liquor between IL O'Clock Saturday
night and II o'clock Sunday night and pun
ished. He was afterWard Indicted by the
grand Jury and punished IN the corporation
court for the same offense. The court of
appeals affirmed the action OF the corpora
ton court, and the mayor, as throwing
light on the local matter, quoted the deci-
sion OF the higher court, which was as fol-
lows: - -. "
But, in addition to what we have said
on the subject, we have further to say that
the statute embraces g. period which is not
embraced in the ordinapcaathat is, from Y
of the succeeding Monday morning. No
sale Of intoxicating drink- nor keeping open
bar during that period would be a viola
ton Of the ordinance. whereas 9 sale OF
place than the one governed BIZ such ordi-
nance would be violation Of the statute.
This would create pafpable difference
and inequality in the law governing differ
ent localities OF the same state and could
never have been contemplated or intended
by the legislature" -.--
Some discussion followed the reading Of
this communication. but the question OF
the ordinance over his veto, was not put to
al vote. Mr.. johnson moved that the mat
ter be referred to the Joint committees on
general laws and finance. and the motion
was carried.
Street Improvements.
A favorable report was received from the
joint committee streets and general laws
on the ordinance authorizing parking sur
rounded by small ornamental fences on
streets where new paving has been laid
and where roadway has been reduced to
thirty two feet. The report was adopted,
Messrs. Uhler, Snowden and Leadbeater
voting against 1t. ....e7
A resolution was received from the street
committee authorizing that committee to
proceed with the prelfminarieS necessary
for the construction of sewer under
Washington street from Duke to Wilkes
street This was passed AFTER CONSIDER
able discussion.
Councilmen Spinks and McCuen wanted
to know why certain sewer construction
provided for by council some time ago had
not been commenced. Chairman Lead
beater Of the street committee explained
that the city engineer had been kept busy
recently with the improvements on King
street. and had very little time to devote
to minor street affairs. =.
The question of the, purchase OF steam
nd
Mr.. Leadbeater said that his committee was
not ready to make a report at that time.
He thought that new machine would cost
something more than $1,000
King Street Paving.
A long communication was received from
Messrs. Cuvillier & Co.. contractors for
the paving in King street. in which the his
tory of the unexpected delays and embar-
easements connected with the work was re-
cited. and council was petitioned to allow
the firm an additional compensation with
which to meet the losses incurred.
The petitioners stated that the contract
had been completed at q great loss, and al
legged that the work had been suspended by
order OF the city engineer by reason OF the
failure Of the electric railroad company to
provide suitable rails for the track along
the line Of improvement and that notwith-
standing the protests from the contractors
they were repeatedly restrained from push
ing the work. and were, thEsatened with ar
rest II they attempted tn nfocaed contrary
to the engineers qrdeES.or Il, .rrvs
could not 1 es done aaffsa E @
was below IS ,dsgessu and that the delays
and interruptiops- thew the bulk Of the
job IN the severe weather Rf tWinter, when
much further, difficulty swas eneountered.
that the contract should have been COM
pieted in eighty days with q profit Of ST. 500.
whereas on account OF delays for which
the contractors wereg net responsible the
including the amounes ~hieh was figured
on as the reasonable pfeflts
Losses Would Faaiao ns Creditors.
It was ,,s further the n. snan mi
creditors. many Of whom are business men
Of this city. Among those mentioned as
being creditors for considerable amounts
are William A. Smoot 4 Co., Mutual Ice
Company. w. E: Balm and the Alexandria
brick works. =
The company offered In the petition to
lay before council all books, ETC., connected
with the contract, and 1t was stated that
a full investigation was desired in lieu of
carrying the matter to the courts. After
the communication was referred Council
man Spinks arose and said ha: wished to
deny the reports that: he was a member
of the firm Of Cuvillier & Co.
A resolution was adopted appointing the
mayor, the. presidents Of both boards and
the committee ON gspera1 laws a. commit
tee to consult With the corporation attor
ney in reference to changing the city char
ter to conform with the new state constitu-
ton
Penny Story Denied.
The statement thai q large number Of
1902 pennies had been Collected and sold
~ MI -ojfS fnv>
cents apiece is positively denied. When