Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1914-04-27
STATEMENT UNTRUE
SAYS COUNSEL BIRD
Trenton's Legal Representative
Hits Back Hard at Sem
ator Hennessy.

TRENTON, April 27-City Solicitor
Charles T.. Bird has made it quite
clear that he doesn't propose to sub
NIT to criticisms aimed at him for his
attitude of safetygby Senator Charles
O'Connor Hennessy, because of the
handieapping effect the latter's So
called "home rule act is having on
Trenton and other commission-gov-
erned municipalities.
Mr.. Bird Is chairman of the COM
mittee of fire lawyers representative
OF commission governed cities. who
are seeking a way out of the situa-
ton, created by the Hennessy law
whereby public improvement bonds
can no longer besold.
In a statement given out for publi-
cation Counsel Bird, among other
things, says:
q was not approached by Senator
Hennessy or any other person re-
garding the enactment of Senate No
20, and any statement to the effect
that | was spoken to respecting that
measure and treated the subject in
differently is untrue.
I did discuss the probable effect
OF the enactment of the Hennessy bill
with a former member of the Legis-
lature and stated at the time that it
was my opinion that The law would
not be passed because of the passage
Of resolution by the Trenton com
missioners, in which it was pointed
out that the confusion which has
since resulted was likely to occur,
and the action of Jersey City authori-
ties respecting it.
An Emphatic Denial.
stated to Philip X. Walcott, of the
firm of Hawkins Delatield & Long
fellow, that the commissioners of
Trenton were unwilling to assume any
more responsibility than that imposed
upon them by the city charter.
Mr.. Walcott has assured me that
he never made any statement to
Lewis r. Conklin. of Ridgefeld Park,
either at his office or elsewhere, to the
feet that his clients meaning the
commissioners of Trenton), were un-
willing to assume greater RESPONSE
bilities than We're conferred upon
them by the city charter and the
Walsh act.
II am not informed as to the nature
of the conversation that took place
between Mr.. Conklin and Mr. Wal
colt concerning proposed amendments
to the Walsh act
Il void like to have it nderstooud
that the firm of Hawkins, Delatield
& Longfellow was retained to pass
upon the validity of the Trenton bond
issue, and that all the questions
raised respecting the operation of the
so-called Hennessy home rule act had
been raised and were being discussed
for several days prior to the time |
visited the offices of that firm.
"Messrs. Hawkins, Delafield &
Longfellow are men eminent in their
profession, and | called upon them,
first, because they had been retained
by the city to pass upon the proposed
bond issue, and secondly because /
knew that | would profit by gen.
eral discussion with them of the prob
able effect of the Hennessy act upon
the government of the city of Tren-
ton.
Not Reactionary
Senator Hennessey has also
charged that ! am a reactionary and
that my opinion for this reason
should be disregarded He has stated
that ] drafted a bill for Introduction
in the Legislature of a reactionarY
character which Never saw the light
of day ] did draft a bill for the
purpsoe of meeting certain conditions
existing here in our own government.
THAT bill. ! think, can hardly be
regarded as reactionary in character.
since every single object eembodied
i'm that bill has been effectively at
tanned by the passage of Senator
Hennessey's home rule bill. This, it
seems to me. disposes of his criticism
of the bill in question