The Detroit times., 1911-06-28
COMMUNICATIONS.
from the Mayor.

10 the Honorable the Common Council:
s Gentlemen--I return without my APP
Droval that portion OF the proceedings OF
your Honorable Body In your session
~ No. zs45. NeisonviIle Brick Company,
estate. si,573.01.
The above item Is, as understand IL,
{or brick purchased by the Department
" Public Works under the existing con-
tracts for furnishing paving brick for
<he City OF Detroit.
Ny reasons for vetoing the payment
~ this claim are embodied in a com
munication from me under date OF June
q 1911, addressed to your Honorable
BQ6y, and 10 be found on pages s26, s27.
80 and s2s of your official proceedings;
0Ino IN a communication under date OF
June ~. 1911. and found on pages s65
01d 266 OF your official proceedings: also
~ n communicative under date OF June
~ 1911. and found on page 1000 OF your
o1icinl proceedings.
) IN addition TO the several reasons
which / have presented at some length
ID my recent communications TO your
Honorabie Body for disappearing the pay
# 1out OF these bills and on account OF
(1e absolute refusal OF the Commissioner
~ public Works to submit these brick
- the RATHER test, desire to call your
attention 70 the fact that by his refusal
Iho Commissioner has defied the express
W1oh*of the Common Council as conveyed
- him by the resolution OF Aid. Gilman
presented and adopted at meeting OF
NE Council on March %, 1903.
A. that session OF the Common Coun-
<lI the Council. by unanimous vote OF the
1I0ermen present, approved the con-
Ir1cts which had been entered into by
NE Commissioner for paying brick TO be
z1Inished TO the city during the year
1903. and In the report OF the Committee
- Streets. which was unanimously
41opted. the Committee used the follow
nc language:
Tn this connection your Committee
~ leave TO state that we secured sam
PIES OF the various brick accepted by the
U1Dortment and ordered same tested,
but this test the Commissioner claims II
@nfirely unfair. and that Notwithstanding
~ outcome OF the test. he Is willing 20
111umc the entire responsibility OF the
quality OF the brick selected, and recon-
cnoed for acceptance by him, and In
view hereof and the further fact that In
1ur Judgment the accepted prices are
|easonabie. we recommend that the var
Icu1 contracts entered into by the Depart
ntnt with the aforementioned firms be
approved and confirmed. -
Before adjournment OF the same meet
nx the Following resolution, presented by
40: Gilman. was adopted without dis
by AID. Gilman: Resolved, That the
Xoumissioner OF Public Works be, and he
q hereby requested 20 purchase rattier
xor testing paving brick, at an expense
not 20 exceed the sum OF $3.50 and pay
pense o. SANE out OF General Road
am unable 10 ind from A careful
<11xniuafion OF the records of the coun-
II any report from the Commissioner
"a BIZ having acted In compliance with
~ 1n1(ructions OF the Council. or any
X<f1on OF the Council resembling its d.
>1<lon 20 the Commissioner as above set
d ny recent comnunications. believe
have quite clearly demonstrated that
- |1uf = N rnl ~
seeking 20 obtain the best material
r4vine purposes.
~ the members OF the Common coun-
Who were present at the meeting OF
&rrh "a. 1909. az which the above
action was taken. were the fol-
|u< Aldermen who are now members
Iour Honorable Body: Aldermen
-. burton. Ellis. Field, Garvey. Gin
0rfnd1cy Gutman. HARPER. Keat.
m1r&i Thcisen. Thompson. Tossy
1or walsh. Watson and Zoeiler.
>nurnf a. 10 me BY the action there
- {hnf the Common Council has com,
itself 70 the RATHER test and ] an
Iorr 70 understand what reasoni
|onorafle Body may have for re
nom me position there taken. Th'
sinner Of Public Works has natl,
~ inflow the presidents estab
&nf n Iiru thereof, has onere<
|# personal guarantees endorsing
tu'<t< 81 the manufacturers 81