Morning journal and courier., 1881-09-29
Special Committee on Water.

Special Committee on Water. A General Consideration of the Water Company Purchase-OpfniOnsO of Prom- | fnent Citizens-The Majority Oppose | the Project. A meeting of the special committee on wa- ter was held last evening in rooms 10 and II | City Hall, Alderman Driscoll presiding
 Several citizens appeared before the com- l mittee, and Alderman Drisco1 asked those | present to express their views.
 Professor Brewer asked what the result would be, 50 far as future contracts were conss cerned, provided the city did not decide to purchase the rights and franchises of the company. Alderman Driscon replied that that was matter yet to be decided. Whether as favor able contract as at present existed could be made was to be decided in the future. This question was now in the hands of special committee, who would report at future meeting.
 Professor Brewer advocated at considerable length the purchase by the city of the fran chises and rights of the company. He thought the struggle for the future was between rich corporations and the people. He said they might not wish to 'tkill the goose that lays the golden egg" yet how much the people or the city can bear in water rates without quite strangling the goose IS | question to be considered. The Professor then considered the sewerage system and the necessity of water to carry of the filth of the city, and said that as matter of future health he doubted if the city could afford to let private corporation, with it's hand on the throat of the city, choke just as hard as it can without choking the life out. It was | a question with him whether private corpo- rations were not as strong as the govern ment, and whether the city might not in the end be the loser by allowing this company to control this franchise. The cry about politicians controlling this matter he did not fear, as the people would control it. If a perpetual contract could be made with this company of course that would take the edge of.
 In reply to Alderman Driscon, Professor Brewer said that if the city could make con- tract of 8 per cent. at simple interest with the company, it would be preferable to a pur- chase. He wanted check of some kind against the company.
 In reply to Alderman Bald yin, Professor Brewer said that in case of purchase by the | city he would consider the city safe in the | hands of city commission or board. He | said I cannot see why it would not be just as safe as any other department which ex- bends money for the taxpayers. He did not believe it would cost the per cent named | to run the works.
 in reply to question, Professor Brewer said as matter of health the city water was more healthy than the average well water, owing..to the sandy condition of the soil and | the drainage from cesspools and privy va ults which run into the wells.
 Ruel P. Cowles favored the purchase of the waterworks. He thought. as the Water company had received 10 per cent. interest | on their investment for the past twenty years, | there could be no danger of it costing the | city more than it did the company to run the | works. He thought it the most important | question that had come before the city for many years, and if they lost the pres ent opportunity it would be a very great l mistake.
 MT. Whiting, of Prospect street, said that he favored the purchase, but if the purchase was made he would consider the question of a better supply of water. If the city could be supplied with water from an elevation of sufficient height to reach the highest points, then the expense of a fire department could in great measure be done away with. He | thought also if contract should be made with the company the question of purity should be considered.
 Francis Donnelly said he had opposed the purchase on the ground that it would be run as political machine. He also thought the city was in debt enough now and he did not wish to see it in debt any more.
 | A. w. Parmelee said that, while he favored the purchase, he would like to hear some ar guments on the other side He thought it would be more advantageous for the city to buy rather than to accept contract. l Professor Brewer said there was quite deep l seated Qf k ing outside, with feeling that they could do better in this way than in public meetings.
 Attorney Hamilton said that an idea had gone out among the taxpayers that unless the city voted to purchase there could be no re- straint placed upon the company in reference to their fixing excessive rates for water for | general use.
 It was thought by some that such course could be prevented by a petition to the Legislature.
 Joel A. Sperry said he had some doubts about the city running the waterworks, His own idea had been that such works could be run cheaper by 8 corporation.
 In reply to MT. Hamilton, Professor Brewer said that he understood that the Water con- pany had bought up every available water resource about the city, so that If the com pany should oppose the city there would be no chance of supply within radius of many miles.
 Joel A. Sperry thought there were ample sources for obtaining water, but he was not prepared to say where they were at present.
 Patrick McKiernan opposed the purchase on the ground that it was more for the bene- fit of politicians that anyone else.
 Joseph D. Plunkett said he could not see how any thinking man who had perused the report of the committee could entertain the position they had assumed He thought the wisdom of the city fathers was manifest in the contract made with the Water company twenty years ago. Now the company say to the city, you can give us your notes, issue bonds and at the end of forty years you will have all this property in your hands. The only question is whether you will take $1, 500,000 worth of property from us and at the end of forty years hold a property tha has not cost you a dollar. It seems to me that the purchase is the only course to pursue. It seems to me to be the duty of the citizens to enter their votes at the coming election in favor of this purchase, in order that we may have good water, plenty of it and at low rates.
 Hugh Daley said he came to hear anyone who would express their views in opposition to this purchase He had heard no argu- ments in opposition to the purchase he was open to conviction, and if any valid reasons could be advanced against the purchase he would be glad to hear them.
 Alderman Baldwin said that although the report of the committee had been printed in the papers, it had not, he believed, been called attention to, even as was the custom in the case of small advertisements.
 Alexander Troup, of the Uraiom took AL derman Baldwin and others to task who had made reference to the way the matter had been treated by the newspapers. He said he did not like these insinuations that were thrown out against the papers, as they had dealt fairly with the city, and, so far as his paper was concerned, published the report as agreed upon. Personally he was opposed to the purchase, as he did not believe it would be for the interest of the taxpayers; he thought he could see 'tjob' in the proposi- tion. He was perfectly satisfied with the water rates: He paid full rates and had not ''been seen" by the Water company any of its representatives.
 Joel A. Sperry said that among his circle of business men he was satisfied from con- versation that if this purchase was made there would grow out of it increased expenses and increased taxation. He said that he had no fear that the water rates would be ad- vanced excessively.
 This closed the hearing and the committee adjourned.