The City Council

In the absence of President Cooley, Aid. Taylor acted as ehairman. The seats of Aldermen Wines, Herz and Hall were vacant. The board of public works submitted a report recommendingthe construction of several sidewalks. The usual monthly reports of the city officers and the iinance committee were also read. Certain residents on Brobk-st asked tliat a fire hydrant be placed at some suitable location on that street. The petition was referred to the fire committee. The proposed ordinance regulating the use of street cars by the public passed to its second reading. No person is to ride on front or rear platform of a car without permission, or get on or pass in front of a car within a distance of thirty feet, when the car is in motion. The penalty for a violation is a fine of not more than $5 or imprisonment in jail for ten days. The street committee reported on the recommendation of the board of public works, disapproving of the proposed culverts on Washtenaw-ave, Hill-st, Fifthst and Felch-st, because they were not needed, and advising that the coping of south University-ave be postponed till nextyear. They also recommendedthai bridge No. 2 be repaired. The council appropriated $500 for that purpose. The board of public works were asked to Eolicit bida for building an iron bridge in place of bridge No. 3. The job of pnnting the ccuncil ceedings in pamphletform was awarded to J. E. Beal, he being the only bidder. The price is twenty-five cents a page. A petition was received from Mack & Schmid, in which they asked permission to discharge clear water from a water power elevator into the gutter on the south side of their store. Tne council unanimously denied the petition. Aid. Martin brought the sewerage question before the council by asking the clerk to read the resolution of the business men's association. Aid. O'Hearn immediately moved that the communication be laid on the table, and the council so decided by a vote of 7 to 2, Aid. Martin voting inthe affirnv ative by mistake. The lfttter asked a reconsideration, saying that he was heartily in favor of letting the people vote on the question of sewerage. His motion prevailed by a vote of 6 to 3,but, as a majority of the council had not voted in the affirmative, Chairman Taylor ruled that it was lost. Cont-iderable discussion ensued, and finally upon advice of the city attorney the ruling was reversed. Aid. Martin then moved to refer the petition to the sewerage committee, but the council decided to table itby a vote of 4 to 5, Aldermen Taylor, Mann, Martin and Kitson voting in the negative. Aid. Martin, in the course of the discussion, informed the council that the sewerage committee would be ready to report at the next meeting.