The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1909-07-20
IMPROVEMENT ON
SOUTH A STREET
IS NOW ORDERED.
An Intellectual Attempt Was
Made Last Night by Re-
monstrators to Have c0un-
Gil Reopen Matter.
BODY NOT PERMITTED
TO ACT IN SUCH MANNER
Case Was Not Finally Dis
posed of Until There Had
Been Considerable Pow
wow Had Remonstrance.

The improvements or South "A street |
from Second to Twenty-first streets is
to be made under order of council. An
ineffectual attempt was made last eve
ming to have council reopen the mat
ter of the ordinance. 1t failed because
such action is not permitted under the
operation Of the rules of council A
remonstrance against the improvement
signed by 80 property owners was re-
ceived by council. The contract for
the improvement is to be awarded Fri
day. 1t will mean cement sidewalks,
curbs and cutters the entire distance.
Under the rules of council in order
for an ordinance to be recalled and re-
opened for discussion, y member OF
council who has voted with the ma
jority on the ordinance, must present
a written notice at the same meeting
that he intends to call the matter up
at the next meeting. This was not
done in regard to the A street improve
ment, and so it was beyond the power
of council to intercept except by re-
pealing the ordinance.
What Law Provides.
1t is provided by law that the re-
monstrators must be resident property
owners. Among the demonstrators
was DR.. Ewing and he addressed coun-
Gil upon the subject. DR.. Ewing lives
in the north half of a double house on
the northwest corner of Twelfth and
10
A street side, so had been held non
resident property owner, although the
board of works had counted him as
resident owner. DR.. Ewing based his
claim as a resident owner on the
amusing assertion made before coun-
ell that he and the occupant of the
south half of the house use the same
garbage can. Some Of the councilmen
wondered If a resident farther north
| in the block would expect to qualify as
a resident owner, II he carried garo-
age and dumped 1t into the same re-
ceptacle the doctor uses.
Spoke Against II.
The matter was not disposed of until
after considerable discussion. Several
of the demonstrators were present and
spoke against the action council had
taken. They declared 1t had not been
altogether fair in every particular.
The remopstrance, which was present
ed. claimed the signers had had no
notice or knowledge that councils &C.
ton was contemplated and that had
they received such a notice, they would
have appeared and demonstrated Civ
ing rood and valid reasons. 1t was
charged the ordinance was passed with
such speed and celebrity as to deprive
tho petitioners Of the opportunity te
demonstrate.
The communication stated 1t was the
belief Of the signers It is a privilege
that should be extended to all citizen!
to be afforded full and fair opportunit,
to be heard upon a matter before thu
burdens and expenses of an improve
ment are imposed upon them ant
their property. It was asked that II i
were deemed advisable to introduce
another ordinance for making the i'm
provement, the demonstrators Nigh
receive notice of its tendency and b
given the opportunity to appear and b.
heard.
Among the signers were: Eli Rob
erts, George E. Kemper. George Fer
ling, John F. Mccarthy. T. J. Fergu
son, H. Shofer, w. F. Osborn, T.
Taylor, Leni e. Ewing and Narcissa L
Jenkinson.