New Britain herald., 1929-04-11
CITY ID PAY BILL
 FOR RUBBER COATS
Judee Kirkham Rules Purchase
 Did N0t Violate Ordinance

The city ordinance relating 10 the nurcEase of materials from Commis- sioners does not refer to the buying of supplies but has 10 do with con- tracts for public Improvements Corporation Counsel John II. Kirk ham advised today ii statement 10 the council H which he recom- mrnds that check for S150 he is- sued to the Farrell Clothing Co, III payment fer rubber coats furnished the fire department.
 Al he March meeting of th" coun- cil. the hill was held ID when Alder man J Gustave Johnson made the claim that ii is contrary to citN ordinances to allow the fire board 10 purchase from the Farrell Clothing Co. 2 stockholder Of which. Harry A. BeckWlth, is a fire commissioner. Members Of the fire board protest ed. and after se> eral conflicting recordings ot the common councils action. one of which indicated q vote to pay the bill. had been fur nished Comptroller Hanford l.. Cur tis, Judge kirkham advised that the bill he held up for a month.
 Meanwhile. he has prepared the following opinion as requested ny Alderman Johnson
 "RegardiDg legality Of sale of sup plies 10 the board ot fire commls- sioners, Section i. Chapter \, ordI- nanops. provides that.
 .''- no members Of such board. commission or other officer having direct charge of any public improve ments shall have any interest. direct or indirect, in any contract relating thereto.'
 This entire ordinance has 10 do with contracts for public improve ments and is not applicable o the purchase of supplies necessary in the ordinary conduct of a department
 should the common council de- sire to make the ordIance applicable to ordinary purchase Of supplies it can do so by amending the ordI- nance.
 "A further question Is as to whether the transaction Nds legal
 Section 6443 Of tine general statutes points to the illegaltty ot the transaction provided the sale Was profitable sale.
 By common law municipal of fcers cannot be interested in con tracts of any character with the city.
 T quote the following from Me Quillin on Municipal Corporations, Volume 2. Section 5S1:
 Municipal charters and laws usually forbid members Of the coun- cil or governing legislative body, and all other local officers from being di- rectly or indirectly interested in any contract with the city. or any de partment or institution thereof. Some laws declare all such contracts void. and some prescribe criminal punishment These express provisions are merely declaratory of the con- mon law doctrine and apply 10 all public officers, including municipal.
 "lt is held in some cases, that NHttt q contract IS not tA pltSSlS lol- bidden by law, between an otficiai and the city. the demands of public policy have been satisfied by allow ing the officer to recover, not on his contract, but for what the goods were reasonably worth.
 The policy of the law would seem to cover partnerships in which the officer is member ot pecuniarI- ly interested and also a corporation in which the municipal officer is an officer. director or stoCkholder.
 The fact that the ordinance is limited to contracts regarding pub lie improvements does not by Impli- cation repeal the common law as 10 other contracts made by public Of ficers in which they have a personal financial interest. even though me council had such right 10 alter tho law.
 T advise that the council author ize the comptroller 10 pay the bill. provided it is O. the opinion that the coats were reasonably worth the price charged"