The Pensacola journal., 1905-03-24
Mr.. BLISS
MAKES REPLY
SAYS al" STREET ORDINANCE e
CONTROVERSY WILL NOT
DEVELOP INTO PER-
SONAL ONE.

Editor Pensacola Journal:
note Mr.. Muldon's letter in reply
to mine of the DAY previous and | de-
sire to state that / am determined to
not let this matter develop into per-
sonalities, for | have more important
matters to deal with. The point that
made in my letter was that Mr.. Null
don got an ordinance through the city
council by which a street was aban-
doned and by which Mr.. Muldon OBJ
tanned valuable water front property
without having to give the city one
cent for remuneration, and Alderman
Reilley, now candidate for mayor,
was a party to the transaction.
have no personal grievance against
Mr.. Mul0On and do not want to injure
him in any manner and | want him to
have all that belongs to him. But l
am opposed to anyone taking the pub
tic streets by ordinance or otherwise
and building fences to the inconven-
fence of the public and to the injury
Of other people.
l have carefully noted Mr.. Muldon's
caro- and l find that he does not deny
L
cifically except as to what | said in
regard to "railroading" the ordinance
through To disproye this he gives a
record history of the ordinance, which,
without me verifying it, will accept
as correct. From what he says the
ordinance was recommended from the
Board of Public Works on one day
and next day it passed two readings
OF the council. l am inclined to think
that was considerable speed, but as
it is possible that l am not a good
judge | will leave the matter to 9TH
ers. The ordinance did not come be-
fore the council again for some time
and when it did come it was put back
on its second reading in order to
amend It and eliminate the abutting
property owners whose signatures
could not be obtained. Mr.. Muldon,
himself, made this statement in the
council The ordinance then went
back to the engrossing committee,
where / supposed it would stay until
the next regular meeting, as l was not
aware that an ordinance could be
passed in a special meeting called for
another purpose. | did not think the
ordinance would pass at all, judging
from what several councilmen had
told me, and at least l did not have
the slightest suspicion that they
would allow it to pass in special
meeting called for another purpose
and knowing there was opposition to
the measure.
Passed In Special Meeting.
1 made no secret of the fact that l
intended to carry protesting petit
tion before the council of at least a
thousand signers against the ordi-
nance. / so stated in Alderman Reil-
ley's place of business, and if am not
very badly mistaken l said so to Al
derman Reilley himself. A few days
later the ordinance was brought up in
a special meeting without my knowl-
edge and passed.
| have never been able to regard
this matter as anything but an unfair
and high HANDED dealing, and 1 am
pretty sure the people share with me
in my view of the matter. / am well
aware the law is sufficient protection
against such Illegal action but l do not
think that any private citizen should
be compelled 10 engage council and
go into the courts to keep open the
public thoroughfares of the city.
Should become mayor l will make it
a point to see that the public thor
oughfares are kept open and not make
it necessary for private citizens to
get petitions and courts to preserve
to them their rights Nor would l as
a member of the Board Of Public
Works permit such a Recommendation
to go to the council, and should the
council pass such an ordinance as the
L street ordinance | would veto 1t.
am not only opposed to the council
giving streets and water front to an
alderman, but | am opposed to giving
it to anyone else, unless the city be
fully compensated.
CHAS. H. BLISS.