Waterbury evening Democrat., 1906-10-16
BOARD OF ALDERMEN
Disagree With Mayor Thems in Using
 Voting Machines Ia Novomber.

night. Chairman Filling presiding. and all the members being present
 except Mir Nell and MT Hurley. Bids
 were opened and read for the sale of
 $100,O00 sewage disposal | per cent
 bonds as followss
 Blake Bros X Co, Boston, $lO3,-
 $50; Denison & Farnsworth. Boston,
 HO3,637; N. w. Harris & Co, $lO3.- 164; Rhoades & Co. New York, $103,.
 o90; Blodget, Merritt & Co, New
 York, $1O2.337; R. l.. Day Co, Bos- ton, $102,14O; Kounts & Co, New
 York, $102.067; Moore, Baker & Co, Boston, $102.S15; Jackson & Curtis,
 New York, $l01.161: k. H. Gay Co.
 Boston, $l01,020 Connecticut Saw ings bank. New Haven. $100.SS w. J. Hayes X Co. Boston, $100,s75.
 The proposition of Blake Bros X Co was accepted. The interest is pay able semi-annually and the principal in 1886.
 A communication was read from the mayor stating that in accordance with instructions from the board he had made arrangements to equip the different wards with Standard and voting machines for the state elec-. tfon. Mir Goss expressed some sur- prise at this and said he didn't think that the vote to which the mayor re- ferred authorized or contemplated the use of any more machines than were provided for the town election. Mir Goss was not present when the vote was passed, but those who were claimed that the intention of the meeting was to put machines in all the districts. Then Mir Goss and MT Larkin questioned the legality of machines and after bitter fight suc- ceeded in getting the vote authoriz- ing their use rescinded and an order passed directing that the November election be held according to the se- cret ballot law of the state.
 Alderman Spain made vigorous fight for the use of the machines, not because he cared. he said, bu, on ac. count of the fact that the mayor hai been authorized to go ahead and ar range to that effect and besides le believed in standing by a city attor- ney when you have one Mir Kellogg was asked to give his own personal opinion regarding the legality of the and stated without any hedging that he believed their use perfectly legal, but added that he didn't want to be understood as d. vising the board to do as he said and also reminded the board that the att torney general differed from him on that question.
 Alderman Larkin said that Bridge port and other towns where they had figured on putting them in had de- cided to walt another year. and Mir Walker and Mir Fitzsimons said word or two in favor of the old plan.
 ''The city attorneys opinion is good enough for me-" replied Mir Spain. "The statement has been made that other towns are not going to use them, but who knows whether this is true or not? We voted to use machines, authorized the mayor to provide them, and th~ city attorney believed with the mayor at that time that their use was legal and neither of these gentlemen have seen or heard anything since to convince him he had erred. % I see no reason why we should falter at this time"
 The question was finally put. but the chair was in doubt and called for a rising vote. All the republicans rallied around Mir Goss and Mir Lar kin. four Of the democrats lined up behind. Mir Spain. and one. Mir Law Tor. didn't register one way or the other. The motion was carried and further barley another reso- lution was offered directing the use of ballots as of yore. This was passed. but the four democrats who appeared still in fighting mood made an on- slaught on it as 1t went by. all shout Ing No"
 The dog ordinance which was passed to be engrossed at former was knocked out and anoih- er taken up instead. When it came before the meeting Alderman Elton shied few bricks at it. declaring it in plain English. no good. after which It was turned down. Aldermen !. II. Filling, l.. F.. Fitzsimons. D. P. Noo- nan. ]. II. Malone. F.. II. Bowe and W. ]. Spain favoring 1t and Aldermen A. F. Sherwood. F. B. Buck. F. O. Goss. W. ]. Larkin. ]. P. Elton. T. B. Walker and Peter Lawior opposing It. A new draft of a dog ordinance was then submitted by Dr Bland. This was passed to he engrossed.
 X communication was received from John O'Neiil and James Eustice relative to a settlement of the diff ference over damages arising from surface water on Adams street. V was referred to the law com mittee. A petition regarding build Ing lines on Walnut street was referred to the city attorney for and report. Building Inspector Chatfield asked that some body be appointed to prepare list 1f streets on which building lines have been established 90 that he may know where to find them. The inspector foolishly dropped re- mark about some bIunder made in sas. whereupon Mir. Elton. mayor It that time. jumped to his feet and informed the chair that Mir Chatfeld vas not taking to the point at all. The inspector was snuresi out. the ,nIv consolation he got being a hint io bring the grievance before the ,oarl of public works
 All the recommendations of the her boards were approved. Several new petitions were suitably referred
 The board then adjourned.