The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-09-23

sewering the city was settled. Besides
that. too, he said he did not doubt hut
mat it would be big factor in the de-
termination of the government to locate
building here"
Mr.. JONES the banker said: II do not
own any property OF my own in the
sewer district, but control the vote on
some that will favor the sewerage. We
Can't afford to do without it.
WALKER BROTHERS are absent from
the city, but they are on record as be-
ing In favor of sewerage, and their
heavy interests in the proposed district
will do an immense amount towards
turning the scale. MIR. Cheesmsn,
cashier of the Union National. said he
had not the least doubt that the
Wakes would remain silent on the
question, which will be the effectual
way to cast an affirmative vote.
Mr.. HILLS cashier of the Deseret
National, said he could not speak ad-
visedly, but he had no doubt that the
bank would favor the plan proposed.
Nh. BACON, of the Salt Lake Bank, had
no interests that would vote, but he
thought that digging out ths rorien
cesspuols vas the only way of making
Salt Lake permanently b autiful city.
NIB. DooLY. of Wells. Fargo & Co.,
was most emphatic: Yes sir; every
foot OF land own will 60 for sewerage,
and the greater port OF II is vacant
land. [ own thirty-three rods on the
situated. and that property, Wells,
Fargo & Co.'S. property, and everything
else for which | am agent will go in
favor of sewerage"
The most vigorous opponent 10 the
scheme was found in
DR.. J s. RICHARDS, heavy owner
on block IS, who reco' ded himself as
intending to fight it first, last and all
the time.
II believe | shall unite the block on
which own, solid against it, he laid.
Then you are moving to that end :"
DECIDEDLY"
What are your reasons ?"
II don't believe the city demands it or
needs it. l have given this thing care
full study. and weat myself and in
spected the Walker House, the White
House, the Wasatch bullding. and back
of Godbe, Pitts g. Co. L found them
literally reekipg. Sewerage for those
places is need very much-out such
places could be counted on the fingers,
and there is no need of sewering the
great district they have mapped OUT"
Then would you favor limiting the
sewer district to Main Street,"
No. l think even that is more than
is required. Those places have
name d should be made to deposit their
sewage in air lisht cesspools, and it
could then be pumped into air tight
receptacles and cartel away; nothing
more is needed"
"But what about the growth and pro-
gress of the city?"
"Oh, it would be-
A GOOD THING FOR THE CITY
grant. But 1 do not bslieve the
people who are to be taxed, want it.
Mr.. FRED AUERBACH. speaking for
Auerbach Bros, who have an interest
in the magnificent VI ain Street building
now nearing completion, and whose
possessions in the sewer district reach
up to an immense figure, said: I'VE
are for it, emphatically. We view sew
erage for a city that intends to grow,
as being as much a necessity as light
and water. In the East any city that
amounts to anything has paid the first
attention to sewerage. No. we've done
our last building in Salt Lake until we
have sewerage"
BISHOP LAWSON could hardly speak
for the Salt Lake Theatre. bus he took
the view that the first thing to decide
was 10 find water enough to sewer with,
otherwise we'd have sewer gas enough
to contaminSte the CITY. He would like
to know, too, where III sewage was 10
be dum5ed But, said the
reporter, " the question is first,
do the people want sewerage? Sup
pose these things were ASSURED,
what would the vote OF the Theatre bef"
Why, then, as far as am concerned,
| should favor sewerage.
ALoNZo YOU'VE said hs thought
Woollty, Young Il Hardy would favor