The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-06-23
TO FIGHT AGAIN
OVER ABATT|0.IR.
CONTINUED From First Page:)8

and the motion Of Z Mr.. satterfleld pre-
availed-ayes, 6; noes, ~ Il. .s lfs. III
L The vote was: 4Ayes-Messr Bennett
gCottrell FERGUSON Satterfield, Umlauf
and Hobson (6) u Yoes--Mr. Gates q.
Dr. Oppenhimer, president o.. the Board g q
Of Health, made statement IN when
he said he had Officially approved the
proposition, provided the plant should be
conducted in such a manner as not TO
become q nuisance. II It should not be,
SO I. operated and maintained. he would
favor closing it up. He said the ordt-4
nance, II passed. should be properly sate-
guarded. If the concern should erect ana
one rate a plant which would not become
A a 4 nuisance, he favored the ordinance;
If not, he would not favor ". e #
Viewed With Alarm.
n. Mr.. N, w. Bowe, representing some
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS opposed the ordinance
and said the commit tee should certainly
proceed carefully in the matter He de-
clared he had not seen q single mon
who did not view the question with u
great alarm, and he thought the COM
$mittee should get the benefit Of The expe-
Renee OF other cities before taking flnal
action. Mr.. Bowe asked for "a stpone-
Sment Of at least two weeks, In order
that Both sides might be fully heard.
Mr.. Henry. s.. Hutzl or spoke for hlm- Inn
self and the Committee on Health ana
Sanitation OF the. Chamber of Commerce.
He vigorously opposed the ordinance
MI. Hutzler read letter, from members
of his committee, offering earnest oppo-
sition. The letter was signed by Drs.i
George Ben Johnston, Stuart Mcclure
and Lewis G. Bosher. !. III
Mr.. u. Fl. Drake, Jr., offered the pro-
test of the Civic Improvement League,
and said his people opposed the move, on
the ground that It would be an intolera-
BILE nuisance.
MI. Brauer's Opposition.
Mr.. Fred Brauer of New York, was
opposed to the ordinance and SPOKE
vigorously against Ut. He said: he was y,if
Interested In business way AGAINST lne
proposition but that ne va ran 1no'1 to Mr.
rorbes but he thought the operation OF
such a plant in a city. would Inevitably
prove q nuisance W "A o
NJ, a. i. strause, OF strause, Gunst &
"a was opposed to the proposition, and
he asked that it DO rejected.
Mr.. 1t u. Z AToIS Judkins supplemented
what; Mr.. Drake The a sa!d on behalt !, o. o.
gty!S 1MgT9vssn should easq BE- de-.
feated,IS Sefa nttG " 8, J, s., !, 49,
AIr.itI. Nj Vaughan, VI, SPOKE i q
3the ordinance and sad the establishment
proposed would result IN great damage rtt''
4 "a his tobacco business.
# strong opposition tWas offered by y, M.
Charles w. spicer and Mr. William,
Of Williams s. Hehling, followed alons
tho same line, II /,
MI Ryland Gwathmey appeared as O
c,t'zen. md The declared that he feared
the "proposed giplnnt would be great
nuisance to the lresidential sections OF
a.
-" The hext speaker was Mr.. George G.
Ar,regory. and lie i followed the line OF
those who had preceded him, Mr.
Gregory. thought the abattoir might as
we'll be put ~ the middle 81 s' ~
street, near Monroe Park.
Mr.. Edgar d. Taylor earnestly on
Snosed speedy act lon, and naked that the
fullest opportuNlty be given all parties
\ to be heard, s1s, az III.
Tho clerk laid before the con1sllttee