Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1921-10-07
FIRE DEPARTMENT
CASE REARGUED IN
CHANCERY COURT
City Seeks to Eliminate the
Bond Phase of the Matter
at Issue.
OTHER POINTS ARE RAISED

The Chancery Coart was crowded by
interested citizens this morning.
when Chancellor wolcott sat TO hear
re-argument on one or two points In
connection with the preliminary IN
junction he granted several weeks ago
against the directors of the Dopart-
ment of Public Safety and City
Treasurer White. prohibiting them
from making any payments in con-
nection with the creation OF the pro-
posed paid fire department. Among
the interested spectators were Mayor
Harvey. Safety Directors s. X. Smith.
w. Il. Megear and I. p. wickersham.
Councilman McManus, Fire Chief
w. j. Lutz and large number OF
firemen.
=. Warren Green, assistant city So
licitor, appeared on behalf OF the city
and Robert G. Harman argued for his
clients, who retained him to bring the
original proceedings.
Mr.. Green sprang a surprise at the
very outset, when he offered certi-
fed copy of an ordinance passed by
City Council, repeating the ordinance
providing for bond issue of $6gT,-
~ ~ TOY ANA NAt INV ilAtantIAfAi
He did this 10 secure dissolution of
that portion of the injunction relating
TO the bond issue and claimed that
due TO the fact that the bond ord,-
nance had been repealed there is now
no further need OF any enjoining i'm
connection with this phase of the case
Mr.. Harnan said he had anticipat-
ed something like this and he had no
serious objection to this being done. as
il was proper and would eventually
come anyhow. but he wanted this par
tial dissolution brought about in the
right way He claimed there should
be written motion TO this effect and
supported by proper afIidavits. He
also argued that he un lorstood the
sole purpose of today's hearing was
to argue the question OF the safety
directors right TO make contracts and
purchases without first advertising
for competitive bids.
The chancellor said motion TO
dissolve the preliminary injunction
can be made at any time, but he
agreed il should be written motion
and supported by affidavits. Mr..
Green then agreed 10 make his motion
in writing later on.
Ordinance OF An Old Council.
Afr. Green, getting down to the real
purpose of the hearing, stated that
with regard to the question of the
safety directors making contracts
without first advertising for bids. he
understood the court. in its original
decision. had based its ruling on an
ordinance passed in 1870 and pro-
viding that all work and purchases by
the city when in excess of $50 should
be made only when competitive bids
had been secured. He called atten-
ton to the fact that il was an ordi-
nance passed by the city Council and
was not an act Of the Legislature or
a provision of the city charter. He
claimed il was binding only on the
particular city Council that had passed
that ordinance and not on any subse-
Guent Council He quoted at length
from numerous authorities and court
decisions to sustain his argument.
Mr.. Green claimed the ordinance
passed in 1870 had been repealed and
he called attention to an ordinance
dated January Is. 1888, which is an
ordinance defining the duties Of the
printing committee of Cit Council
The third section provides that the
said committee shall direc. all neces-
sary advertisements for sealed pro.
posals for any public work or con-
.-act and the committee shall say
when, where and how much adver-
tising shall be done. Section 5 re-
peais all ordinances inconsistent with
this one. Mr.. Green argued that this
repealed the ordinance of 1870. be-
cause the printing committee of
Council shall direct printing work.
Continued on page 6