The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-05-03
ALDERMEN REFUSE TO ACT
tcontinuea from First Page.l

f receive the attention that the situation I demands and hat an opportunity to j present evidence before an unbiased tri- bunal may be afforded to those who have informally laid serious charges at the door of our public officials, the un- ! dersigned citizens and taxpayers would respectively petition your honorable board to take action as follows: 4 Resolved, That the president of this board be. and he hereby is authorized land instructed to appoint special com- mittee, consisting of three aldermen and two unprejudiced citizens to investigate he conduct of the police department and the mayor in the matter of the all legged Temple street pool room and in < other matters in their discretion, and to hold public hearings thereon.
 Resolved, That the corporation coun- { sel be, and hereby is, requested to in form this board, in writing, through the above committee, of the proper pro- < cedure to bring about a thorough and !. impartial investigation of the alleged irregularities of the police commission CTS and the mayor in the conduct of the police department.
 Respectfully submitted
 w. THURMAN,
 VIII. BOYLE, 156 Portsea St.,
 CHARLES A. RICH,
 JOHN A. FOLEY,
 E. M. CAMP.
 Immediately after the clerk had fin- jished reading the communication Alder man Spreyer moved that the commu- nication be tabled indefinitely, and be- EI<-. he had so moved the motion was car ried unanimously. Alderman Spreyer stated after the meeting that the req son why he had so moved was because he did not think that under the city charter the aldermen had any right to interfere in the matter. He said that l the only thing which could be done was, lin case of an Impeachment, to have the lsuperior court settle it.
 A The meeting last evening was well at- Attended, the only absentees being Alder 'Amen Montgomery, Hine Foote and Morse. As soon as the meeting had been called to order Alderman Hosley 'rnoved that when the board adjourned lit should adjourn until two weeks from the present meeting, and this motion Twas unanimously carried.
 @ At this point in the proceedings quite Ia complication occurred. Alderman lSpreyer asked that petition which had just been presented to the board that lE. Schoenberger & Sons be permitted to have an extension on their awning over their store on George street should have unanimous consent for immediate action.
 Chairman Logan ruled that as there had been no first reading of the com Ismunication, and as it had never been referred to any committee, it could not be acted on until it had been so treated. IA somewhat lengthy discussion then occurred among several of the members as to whether this was proper inter- pretation of the charter or not. Finally Alderman. Spreyer appealed from the ruling of the chair and the question was but to a motion whether the chair should be sustained or not, which re- suited in the chair being sustained by a vote of to 4.
 Alderman Spreyer then moved that the corporation counsels opinion should be asked for concerning this question. 4sAlderman McGuinness said that the tnatter was not of enough importance FLU JULIET dUOul, ilu uS diuSiluSu tiidl the motion be tabled. His amendment was not seconded.
 Aldermen Wheeler and Elliott both seemed to think that Alderman Spreyer was right in his contention and that the corporation counsel should decide it. The board then voted to leave it to the torporation counsel to decide
 A petition to the effect that five al lermen be appointed to act in conjunc- ion with the Fourth of July general committee was unanimously carried.
 The Manufacturers Railway compa- ly petitioned the board to be permitted to lay switch track on Clay street, hnd their petition was, by vote refer led to the committee on railroads and bridges.
 In reference to the following commu- lication which was received from May br Studley, Alderman Wheeler moved hat consideration of the matter should be delayed two weeks, and his motion vas carried:
 To the Honorable Board of Aldermen \ of the City of New Haven: Gentlemen-I return herewith your \ brder of April 4, disapproved by me on XApril IA, de assessment of benefits and Manages for the construction of the new bridge over West river and ap- breaches at Kimberly avenue.
 In my opinion the questions arising II this case have not been as fully con- idered by the bureau of compensation
 $ they should be. I believe that the aid bureau of compensation has as- essed damages to the adjoining prop Erty owners as though they were the
 bsolute owners of those properties, and