The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1878-04-06


works ODe Huadred Thousand Dai
lars saved 80 ,he 0iiy Daring IN,
Year what she Company hiss Done
ma Proposes a. 30,
10 the Editor Of the Herald.
II ID not my deaire 10 70 into any con,
troyeray with those who wish TO Oh,
pose the waterworks company, Cor
those who have been ready TO democrat,
ile capital which has beer invested for
the good OF our city by our citizens, aud
in replying TO the article In Tux HERALD
Of the 5lh,by Mr.. Williams, we do 30 for
the reason that he misrepresents some
OF the facts,
Fimt--We deny that the 500 per hy>
drant for the past year was voted m a
bonus, IN stated by Mr., Williams, and
stated no bonus or subsidy from the city
WAS ever intimatod to the council by
tho water works company. We asked
the council to make us u contract for
term Of years for fire protection, and
their excuse for not granting this was
that they (the counciD did not desire
10 lcgislate for longer time than their
term OF Office but that the water CONS
pany would have no trouble IN renewing
their contract each year ! did tell the
members Of the council that feared
the works could not be built unless n
longer contract was made with the com,
pany, Why9 Because was before the
council representing thirtyStive thou
sand dollars Of foreign capital, Az
my own expense ] went TO Louisville,
Kentucky, twice and urged upon the
parties 10 build the works for us, with
only one motive in view, and that was
the great necessity of water works in
our city, and | claim that on the sixth
day Of last June, the waterN orks saved
the city from one hundred thousand
dollar conhagration.
Second-We deny that we refused, as
stated by Mr. Williams, TO not
make "a proposition to the city. The
council adopted resolution that con
tract be closed with the company at a
price not to exceed fifty dollars per ans
mum for each hydrant We asked the
council TO reconsider the resolution, af>
ter which we were ready to make an
offer By vote of to 3, they de
clined to reconsider, and we were re-
quested in the face of this on the res
cords, TO make q proposition, to which
we replied that at the proper time we
would do 30. And why should the
Water Supply company make a propo
siton to the present council, when Dr.,
Crowdus stated before the council, and
in the presence of the writer, that the
present council would not make the
contract In other words twould be de,
ferred until the newly elected council
were installed. Mr.. Williams says that
not more than oneshalf OF the taxpayers
are benefited by the waterworks."
We claim that every individual in Dallas
is benefited. What would Dallas be
without the mercantile and business
interest of Main and Elm streets? Let
fire break ont and consume the greater
portion of these two streets. and what
would be the depreciation Of property
in the residence portion of our city2
Our prosperity depends upon the bust
ness done along the line of the water
pipes. Suppose several of our principal
business blocks should burn, who
knows but that our fate would be like
that of Galveston. One year has passed
since the great Galveston fire. and not
one-twentieth of the burnt district has
been rebuilt. Could Dallas stand such
blow at this time? We ask for nothing
hus what we consider Just and reason
able We claim to save the city in insu
rance double the amount we demand
for the projection given
AS for the city making purchase OF
the waterworks, | will say that the
water company has rot vet offered to
sell the works, and should the city de-
sire to buy they would meet with much
opposition from some of our largest
stockholders, who have put their money
in it with view of makingi it some day a
paying institution. Mr.. Williams says
that the party who wrote the article in
the Morning Call, of which we know
nothing, must be new conner. Well,
it is true, and, perhaps, great pity that
everybody was not born in Texas who
now lives here, for indeed many would
ostracise ones opinion simply because
he was not here to vote for Sam Hous~
ton. am not very late importation
to our state, have lived here some seven.
teen years, and yet hope am closed
with those who wish appropriations
made for grading and sewering our
streets, etc Now, Mr.. Editor, we like
to see the members of our city council
economical and judicious in their APP
preparations and expenditures, but it is
not always wise for persons to be over
conscientious, for we simply ask Of the
city one half of the amount that we
save the taxpayers, and if it did not
cost the water company anything TO
furnish this protection to the city, we
do it at an outlay of ffty>seven thous
sand dollars.
1t is well known fact that very few
private corporations ever build water
works in city where subsidies are not
voted, and where the works are not re-
lieved from taxation. We asked moth
ing of the kind. The company pays its
taxes, and the company does not ask
any more for hydrsnts here than is the
price in nearly every city where water
works are built by private capital. Every
dollar the company can make out OF
the works will be expended in extend>
ing the pipes, and we hope by strict
economy, and a liberal policy on the
part of our citizens, to soon furnish all
who may wish to use the water. Every
dollar received up to date has been
expended in extending our lines OF
pipe. Very respectfully,