Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1921-10-07
FIRE DEPARTMENT
CASE REARCUED IN
CHANcERY COURT
Continued from page
Claims Directors Followed Law

Claims Directors Followed Law.
Mr. Green said as a matter of fact
advertisements have not been made
until recently unless the printing
committee saw AT to do SO
Chancellor Wolcott asked IL the
Street and Sewer Department ad-
yertised for bids and lf 50 IL the
printing committee OF Council had
lanything, to do with such advertise
/ ing. MIR. Green did not know posi-
opinion that the printing committee
| had nothing 10 do with &C.
Mr.. Green then referred TO Section
of the act providing for the paid
! ere department and cited the LAM
guage used therein to the effect that
the safety directors should acquire
properties by purchase or compro-
mise. or condemnation. or otherwise,
at prices to be agreed upon. He
claimed this was a statutory direction
for their action and therefore higher
than any ordinance of Council. lie
\ also argued II precluded any possl-
i hility of asking for bids. ON these
grounds he asked that the injunction
be dismissed. He stood, ne said,
squarely on the undoing OF the legis-
iative act.
Says Ordinance Wasn't Repealed.
In opening his argument. Mr.. Har-
man claimed there was nothing in
| the ordinance of 1883 conhicting with
the provisions of the ordinance of
1870 had been repealed by the pas
sage of the ordinances os 1888 Mr..
| Harman claimed that this would not
hold. for an ordinance is an ordinance
IN itself until 1t has been repealed and
he pointed out that the manner in
which an ordinance shall be repealed
Is clearly set up in the provisions of
the city charter. He argued that due
notice of the repeater must be given
and that this is the only way It can
be done and in this instance none OF
these charter provisions had been
complied with. lie further claimed
that an ordinance is just as binding
upon city Council as it is upon any
one else and that that body must be
governed by its provisions.
Referring to the language OF Sec
tion OF the legislative act providing
for the establishing OF the paid fire de-
nartment Mr.. Harman claimed the
measure had been SO loosely drawn
that 1t was a difficult matter to find
where the city stood He claimed it
was the bounden duty of the direc-
tors of the Department Of Public
Safety TO invite bids publicly for all
work, in order that they could get
everything before them for the bene-
flt Of the city and that then they could,
F, f, in the terms of the act agree on pric-
es.
Mr. Green in rebuttal argued that to
agree or compromise with the lowest
bidder on price might mean that
: the purchase could be made by the
, board after such agreement at a
! price that would be higher than the
next lowest bidder and this he believed
, to be absurd.
e Chancellor WIN Hasten Matter.
Chancellor wolcott asked if there
was any urgency for hasty decision
IL. the matter. Mr.. Green explained
that the original bond ordinance had
been repealed and Council was now
waiting to proceed with another bond
ordinance TO defray the costs of the
new department and the directors
were anxious to know Just what
properties they could include in theii
plan for submission to Council. so the
Council could provide the cash.
Chancellor Wolcott said he had Other
: rlatters demanding his attention
i but he realized the importance of thi;
fifs4a 1,n l.
!, terest in the case and he would there.
y fore drop everything else and Civ,
this his whole attention to the enc
a that he could hand down an opinion
i at the very earliest date. The cour
a made il clear, however, that there ar,
n no legal restrictions under the origi
IS nal injunction preventing the safet,
directors from going ahead with tn
"a plans as have already been starte
10 and which conform to the provision
Il of the legislative act so long as tn
- provisions of the act are in no wa
" violated.
* As regards the section pertainin
te 70 the $4,000 for the Volunteer Fire
mems Relief Association, the cour
lie said there was nothing binding in tn
IN original opinion, as references mad
y there 70 this clause were just made a
matter of course, to include a
questions. The association had nc
ID been represented in court befor
Of Mr.. Harman said he would amend hi
= original bill to strike out referenc
= &c this section. as he nor his client
l. were interested in this matter. Th
Or payment OF the money cannot DO,
rs sibly be made for several month
l. yet and there is ample time for an
N action that may be decided upon r,
n, Garding the payment by the city ,
n this sum.
ID Today's argument had to do SOLE
NJ with the bond ordinance feature an
ID the right of the directors TO make cor
80 tracts and purchases without adve
~ tising for bids A motion was mao
nj that the preliminary injunction
in dismissed SO far as the bond matter
y concerned, decision being reserve
IN however, pending the making of Il
al motion in writing.
4 There is still 10 be argued II
,i- merits of the suit, which cannot
"A done until the city files its answer
the original bin