The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1870-05-04
correspondence.


A Reply from the Trustees OF Water
Works.
ED. DEMoCGAT-In last weeks issue of
the Repository a communication appeared
over the signature of s. and the Trustees
of Water Works have requested the same
paper to publish the accompanying reply
1t would perhaps be matter of interest
also to have both the communication and
the reply published in this weeks Demo-
crat. The communication is as follows:
Communicated
Water Works.
EDS. REP. & REP In looking over the
bank account of the trustees OF water
works, in their report l find they have
paid to "diggers" and the bosses over them
S35, ,526, the report also shows that the
whole length of the pipe put down is 80
40 feet, being over 81 per foot for dig
ging and filling the trenches. Parties Of
fered to dig and fill the trenches after they
had brought the pipes to the city, where
it was much harder digging than in the
fields, at 81 per rod, or about % cts. per
foot. The difference between the amount
paid and % cts. per foot is over 500, ,600
| am aware that some parts of the trench
es near the lake could not be dug for 81
per rod, and that race was dug, but $26-
600 in competent hands would pay for a
large amount of digging As Messrs. Ball,
AultmaU and Laird say, we are indebted
to the trustees for the economy with
which the work has been prosecuted" 1
would ike an explanation Of this part of
the expenditure.
understand they propose borrowing
$55, 900 more to extend the pipes. As the
trenches can be dug for 25 cts. per foot,
and cement lined pipe such as has been
used here costs 60 cents per foot, for inch
and Sc cts. for inch, cast iron pipe of
same sizes cost 81 and 80 cts. per foot,
with transportation in both cases added,
$50 900, if honestly expended, ought TO
put down large amount of pipe.
Canton, o., April q, 20. S.
EDS. REPosIToRY-In your issue Of last
week. we find communication signed s.,
which seems to insinuate that the trustees
of water works did not merit the compli-
ment paid them for the economy practi-
ced IN the building of our works last year.
by committee of responsible and lntelh-
gent business men well known In this
community upon personal inspection and
examination, apart from the very evident
uunfairness to the trustees of SIS sneaking
behind signature, which means anything
or nothing, according to the readers
knowledge of the underhanded means re-
sorted to by certain opponents to embar-
rass the successful progress of the water
works during the past year, the commu-
nifty, We think, would be easily able to de-
| termine between a responsible committees
report upon actual examination, and the
insinuations of an irresponsible party
who dares not make himself known. S.
or any other opponent or friend Of cur
water works can easily satisfy himself
that the work of last years digging, tren-
ching and laying of pipes was accomplish
ed at less expense tn IN any bid ever pre-
sented for our consideration, and with the
most rigid economy on the part of those
who had the work in charge. Why s. did
not properly inform himself before pre-
sentihg himself, as he has done, TO the
| pablic, can be easily imagined sy these