The diamond drill., 1915-05-15
SEAeRAvE TRUCK
SENT BACK
COUNCIL DECIDED MONDAY NIGHT
TO RETURN THE MACHINE
LAFRANcE ASKS FOR PAY
Council Will Not Talk TO That Con-
Germ as Long as the Seagrave
Matter Remains Unsettled

Mdtttt uctfosno ohSHAANo
The controversy over the two
trucks that have been In possession OF
the city OF Crystal Falls. has held the
1boards at the council meetings this
week, beginning with rather stormy
session held on Friday night II last
week.
Friday nights meeting took on
something OF the sembIance Of law
yers scrap" as city Atty Fraser. Clar-
ence Dwyer and Fred ii. Abbott were
present and several tits occurred be-
tween Mr.. Fraser and Mr.. Dwyer.
AS an opener the letter and reso-
luton which Mr. Dwyer sent to the
council we're read by the clerk. The
resolution provided for the return OF
the truck before May 20, as that date
would be just one year from the date
OF the contract and the contract pro-
yided for one year In which TO test out
the truck. Mr.. Dwyer explained In hts
letter that he feared that II the truck
should not be returned within that
date IL would jeopardise the prospects
OF the city in its suit.
Mr.. Fraser Disagrees
Mr.. Fraser took an opposite position
and then the debate started Mr., Dwyer
took the floor and reviewed the entire
history of his connection with the case
He stated that the Seagraye people
came to him and wanted to retain him
as their attorney but as he had drawn
a resolution for the city heiconsidered
It would not be dealing fairly with the
city II he should engage with the Sea
grave people without first taking the
matter up with the city; that he did
take the matter up and that Mr.. CAT
fney. the mayor, with the consent OF
Alderman Penglase, did retain him to
defend the city in the matter; that in
his work for client he had always
had the cooperation OF his client but
that in this instance curious COM
plication occurred in that Mr. Fraser
had been appointed city attorney and
that the council was lending two ears.
one to him and the other to the city
attorney.
The matter was then opened for
free-for-all in which Seagrave. La
France. resolutions. motions and every
conceivable conglomeration In legIs-
latiye and legal way were mixed.
Seagraye vs. Lafrance
Fred w. Abbott. attorney for the La
France company. was present with Mr.
Webster to ask that the city make ar
rangements to pay for the LaFrance
truck. Someone suggested that Il might
be well to have the truck accepted. Mr..
Abbott called attention to the fact that
the council by It's inaction had accepted
the LaFrance truck.
Then there was some excitement. the
LaFrance contract was dug up and II
was plain enough the city was given
60 days iDkwhich TO either accept or re-
ject the machinery and the day OF ac-
tion was passed by one or two days.
Then the lawyers got at odds, Mr..
Fraser accused the past administration
OF having "doctored" the contract
agreed upon. as the so day clause was
not mentioned In the original negotia.
>tions. That brought Mr. Dwyer to his
feet. He stated that the day following
the meeting at which the LaFrance
truck WAS arranged for, the mayor
came to him 10 draw up contract as
the resolution OF the meeting directed:
What he did draw UP contract and
that he explicitly stated to the mayor
and to the LaFrance representative
that In order to make the document
legal some specific time must be stat.
ed In which action was TO be taken and
that 50 days were agreed upon.
Then someone questioned the adop-
tion OF a resolution. Mr.. Fraser claim
ed that no resolution had been adopted
that night; Mr.. KIesges stated that his
motion was a simple motion and not a
resolution. Yet. there the resolution
appeared upon the records In the
clerks handwriting Mr.. Gribblc said
very little but maintained that the res.
oIption was adopted.
Dwyer Quits the Case
Mr. Fraser stated that In his opinion
both contracts we're void for the reason
that the appropriation with which 10