SEACPM18831019_Page_3

384
JOURNAL OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
Oct 19/83

fortunately the City Attorney who drew this Ordinance inadvertently
omitted the provision contained in the original Ordinance, appropriating
the street as extended to the use of the public as a public street. This
omission escaped the scrutiny of the Committee to whom it was
referred as well as the Council and its presiding Officer.

In September 1883 the necessary steps were taken for the ap-
praisment of the land appropriated by the appointment of these
assessors, who have performed their duty as required by law and
by the assessment district. An Ordinance was also passed pro-
viding for the improvement of that portion of Jackson Street so
extended by Ordinance 410 by grading the same and constructing
a sidewalk from the East side of 12th to Market Street.
Under this Ordinance the City made a contract for this improve-
ment with G. N. Alexander, which was executed on Sept 28, 1883
and under its provisions the Contractor has completed about one
third of the Contract and is entitled to a considerable amount in
addition to the sum already paid him, and he is now actively en-
gaged in prosecuting the work. In this posture of affairs it is
brought to the attention of the Council and alleged that Ordinance
410 is defective for its intended purpose, because it omits the
active clause in Sec. 1 of the original Ordinance providing for the
appropriation of the Street to the uses of the public as a public
Street. The vital question to be determined is whether or not this
amendatory Ordinance extinguishes the positive provisions in
the original Ordinances for the appropriation of the land by the
exercise of the right of eminent domain. As I conceive the
law to be this question is certainly free from doubt. Many
rules of construction may be invoked to preserve the vitality of
the Ordinances. The title of the original Ordinance may be called
in aid and that provides in positive terms for the condemnation of
real estate necessary for the extensnion of the Street. Each of the other Sec-
tions of the original Ordinance which remain unrepealed, treats of
the tract of land therein described as being unrepealed. And in addi-
tion thereto Section 79 of the City Charter requires that any Ordinance
or Section thereof amended [-----] be [-----] and Ordinance No.