Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-06-03
once of the society, tc Washington street,
uI.e .e,r.r A.se.sn,en,.


meneys expended by the city in the coustruc-
ton Of sewers and drains, from the benefits OF
which the values of their real estate has
been so largely increased, presents suck a de-
p,orable condition of affairs that | am compelled
to ask the citizens to pause and consider to
what end this course of proceedings is likely to
lead.
To-day the city owes not less than 50, 000, 900,
about 81, 100000 of which was incurred in con-
structing sewers and drains.
Nearly 100000 worth of additional sewer,
were contracted for by the last city government
are now in process OF construction, and must b,
paid for
Our water supply is now, and for about veal
has been inadequate, for the reason that oul
means O. conveying it to the city from the reser
voir are insufficient, and an absolute necessity
exists in order TO protect property from thu
danger of destruction by FIRE, as well AS to pro
vide for the public convenience, at once TO pro
vide the means to supply these wants. The
present city government, approaching this
necessity, have contracted for a new line of ser
wee mains at cost of about $3.50, 900. Our OOll-
CATION to construct the city hospital at a
cost of $4,000, we have incurred, which must
be paid.
The soldiers monument, at a cost Of So, 900,
is contracted for and must be paid for when COM
pleted.
Our interest account will amount the present
wear to S161 900.
tOlSlualAilie
portion is from day TO day and from month to
month maturing and its payment must be pro-
Yided for With no money in the treasury and
no means of supplying it except by borrowing
the question arose early in the year whether the
city should continue to run into debt for the
construction of its public improvements, or
whether it should collect some of the debts due
10 it and hereafter pay as it went along, was con-
sdered by the present city government, and The
latter course was determined upon. To make
and collect the sewer assessment, which had for
four years been neglected, seemed to be duty
imperatively imposed upon the city government
in order to furnish the means most directly
available for replenishing the exhausted and de-
peted treasury. This duty was undertaken and
performed. With most uneXampled earnestnesS
mot to use a more expressive word) attempts
have been made to thwart its payment by the
efforts of the committee of thirty-fiYe, the last
of which was the publication of an opinion of
Judge Curtis, which is so palpably incorrect both
in its law and fact, that ii is clear it must have
been given under an entire mSapprehensiOn of
the facts, and although had determined not to
be dragged into any public discussion of the
sewer assessment in any of its bearings, yet this
opinion, published as it is with such flourish of
drums and trumpets, is so likely to miSead, that
! yield to sense of duty, to state, | hope so
plainly that it cannot be misunderstood, the in
aceuracies of the "opinion."
The learned judge says "the cost of the i'm
for which an assessment can be made"
Why not? The statute provides "that the
city council may make and maintain in said
city all such drains and common sewers as
they shall adjudge TO be for the public health or
convenience and may fix
the boundaries of Mill brook, Lincoln brook,
etc., and may alter, change, widen,
straighten and deepen the channel of said
brook and remove distractions therefrom aud
may use and appropriate said brooks, cover
them, pave and enclose them in retaining walls
so far as they shall ndjudge necessary for the
purposes Of sewerage, drainage and the public
health.
every person owning real estate n ben
Gifted, &c. + shall pay to said city
such sum as the mayor and aldermen shall
assess upon him as his pToportionate share of
the expenditure of the city for sewers and
drains"
This is the law under which the sewers were
constructed and the assessments made.
The authority is to assess abutters, &C., pro-
portionate share of the expenditure Of the city
for seaUers and drains.
Now as the statute says that the city may use
and appropriate Mill brook for the purposes OF
setgeraqe and DRAINAGE, il is more than dIficuit
to see why the cost OF doing it is not portion
OF the expenditure of the city for sewers and
drains, and why portion of the cost is not
liable TO be assessed upon estates benefited by
sewers aud drains.
However, even if the judges opinion is the
correct one (which no one who understands the
subject can belieye) it furnishes no argument
against the validity OF the present assessment
for the reason that no portion of the cost of the
MIL Brook Setger is included IN the present as
sesSment, and only about Il per cent Of the cost
Of the street selcers is covered by it.
The next position taken by the learned Judge
is, that if the whole expenditure has been met
by the issue of scrip, no tax can be laid y
for the purpose of raising fund ia
| meet and discharge the Indebtedness of the city
| upon such scrip or bonds when they shall here
| after become due.
| Why not?
The city is authorized to construct sewers
The city is authorized to borrow money upon it
notes, scrip or bonds to enable it to do the work
Having borrowed the money and with it bull
the sewers, why can il not make an assessmen
for the cost? 1t could not assess until after thu
| sewer was built. 1t could not build the sewer
| without money. There was no money in tn,
| treasury. Ii was obliged to borrow and give il.
| notes, scrip or bonds. Now how does the fact
that it gave its notes for the borrowed money
make it illegal 10 assess in order to raise money
to pay its notes2
Should it be true as legal proposition that
after the city had borrowed the money and
given its notes for payment, no assessment
could be made because it had borrowed and
gwen Its notes, what was the use in providing
that an assessment might be made at all? Ii
was OF course known that the sewers must he
constructed by borrowing money, and if by bor-
rowing, notes or scrip must be given for the
money borrowed. Then why provide for an
assessment il none could legally be made and
make 1t the duty of the mayor and aldermen &c
assess But even if this proposition is true
which no one who will look at it for momeu
can believe, it furnishes no argument against
| the validity of the assessment, because and fol
the reason that the Whole expenditure has no
bee1l met bU the issue of scriD,
| The issue of scrip and the assessment boil
| together, are not sufficient TO cover the sewe
| debt.
The amount Of funded sewer debt at the
| ~ present time ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 9T440
ny assessment $4,000
5aaklng l94 90
The amount of the sewer debt is about. - 1900 Nc
so that neither the entire cost of the sewers ba
been met by The issue of scrip, nor is any PAL
| of the cost of Mill Brook included in the asses,
ment. The cost of erecting or reconstructin
| bridges across Mill Brook is not included as
| expenditure for which seDer scrip was issued, @
the sewer assessment made.
That the assessment should have been mad
forthwith upon the construction of such sewer
| more matter of taste than law in which for
mer city governments did not sgree with tn
learned judge, and it is not perhaps proftabl
/ TO consider which is right.
Having made these statements, | most cheer
fully leave the whole subject with the people will
| thls DFlel recapltulatlon OF the facts:
The assessment does not cover or ipclude The
expenditure upon Mill brook.
Tue sewer scrip issued or authorized and TN
| sewer assessment do not together amount I,
the expenditure Of the city for sewers an,
drains. "'
Only about seventy-one per cent of the cos
Of the street sewers is included in the assess
| ment
No portion of the cost OF bridges is inclzde
| in the assessment.
These facts are open to the investigation {
| any who may be curious enough TO examine
| In the light of this statement, which cannC
| be controyerted, it is strange that Judge Curt
should have labored under such misappreheu
sion, If those who sought his opinion wer
really what they profess, friends of the or
| pressed taxpayer interested only for the pros
| perity Of the city and uninfuenced by "snv feel
ing Of political or personal hostility to the eit
government or any member thereof"
GEORGE +. VERY.
Worcester, June 1, 1874
Tho Assessment Question.
To the Citizens Of Worcester:
The committee Of thirty-fve have read th
communication OF Mayor Very in the Gazett
OF Saturday with feeling Of painful surprise
That the chief executive officer of this cit,