Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1908-05-21
IContinued from Firss Pagel.


and decline to execute the same for
the following reasons: First, have no
record that the contract has ever been
before your body and was approved
by you.
Since an ordinance must be passed
designating the streets to be improy-
ed together with the kind of pavement
proposed to improve them with Upon
an investigation ] can not find that
any ordinance has been legally passed
for such work. The record shows that
on March "a, A. D. 1908, an ordinance
was passed by your body for such
work, and was duly sent to the AIayor
for his investigation, on March 80.
1908, | returned the said ordinance to
the City Clerk, without my approval
and with my objections
At the first regular session of City
Council. after my veto was received
April Z 1908. my communication was
I received and fled and a vote was
ordered taken on the ordinance not
withstanding the veto Of the Mayor
and the ordinance was lost by a vote
OF five>to three. This vote was taken
in accordance with section 10. of tue
City Charter, and the ordinance having
failed to receive a majority of the
votes, of Council it was lost, the Nav
ors veto was sustained, and the or
dinance became dead
also find that on April q, 1908.
| the following motion was passed by a
vote OF six to one.
Councilman Pearson moved that
the ordinance for Improvement of
Broad street from Red Bank avenue
to Cooper street be reconsidered bv
reason OF such action as same failed
to become a law Then Councilman
! Pearson moved that the above men
| toned ordinance be passed over the
Mayors veto, being duly seconded, the
same was passed by vote of seven
to one. This action was irregular and
illegal, and contrary to the 18th sec
ton of the City Charter which pro-
yides that the veto should be consider
| ed at the first regular meeting. after
being received, which was done on
April Z, 1908. The motion to recon
slider made April q, 1908, was illegal
and contrary to the decision of the
Courts.
| do not find that the subject of a
Mayors veto had ever been acted on
IN this State, by the Courts. but in
Pennsylvania the right of a municipal
Council to reconsider a Mayors veto
was decided as follows: ut is not com
petent for a municipal Council to re-
consider its vote, failing to pass a
resolution or ordinance returned with
the veto of the Chief Off1cer.'
AS bonds viii have to be issued, or
money borrowed on notes, to be paid
Ior the improvement all legal forms
must be carried out
Respectfully submitted,
SAMUEL II. LADD.
Mayor.
There was a scratching of skulls
when the above was read. It was re-
celved and filed, and though some felt
the Mayor knew more law than a Law
man IS entitled to know, there was gen
eral acquiescence in his objections.
A communication from the Bell Com
pany saying it would lay conduits as re-
quested, was read.
Mr. Turner, of the Bithuhthic Company,
tod Council that in order for his firm
to lay good street, the trenches dug by
the Public Service and Bell Companies
would have to be properly protected. A
motion requesting those companies to put a
5-inch concrete cap, with 6-inch lap ovsr
their trenches was adopted.
On motion of Mr. Pearson, the Street
committee was authorized to appoint an
inspector of conduit laying, at the expense
Of the Bell Company.
After report Of Mr.. Matlook, the Property
committee was directed to place new tin
roof on the rear building of the City Hall. 4
Mr.. Pearson made a report on his pfo-
posed action in improving Lake Side Park.
Mr.. Paneoast made an earnest plea for
carrying out the ideas, which Mr.. Pearson
promised TO do
An ordinance fixing the curb line on
Edith avenue was introduced, and after
explanation by Mr.. Burkett the rules were
suspended, and the ordinance passed.
An. ordinance providing for the issuance
of $500 Of sewer bonds, to pay the sewer
notes, was introduced by Mr.. shivers and
laid over under the rules.
S. E. Wilmer tickets to Sewell SIS 40
{ Mr.. Pancoast moved that we proceed to
the erection of a municipal building as pre-
pared by architect Peddle year ago. &c
Mr.. Shiyers said this matter ought to be
laid over until after the lot question was
settled, II we purchase the lot, we will
not need the municipal building, if not we
viii need it.
Mr. Panccast replied that we do not need
the building to store stone, but to take care
of our grain, hay and implements.
Mr.. Kugler SAID he favored the building
Mr. Clark SAID he favored the purchase of
the Cattell lots for our rough stuff, and the
municipal building for horses, feed, imple-
.ments, etc.
A motion to advertise for bids for the
municipal building was adopted by the