The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-10-13

lowing report:
| Block 51-For, $72.S]0; against, 400.
| Block 5S-For $43 $40; against, $5O,5OO.
Block 69-For, $612,0 900; doubtful, $92. 900
Block 7O-For. $242, $50; against, $4,000;
doubtful, $685. 900.
Block 6s-FoF. 1ss,5OO; against. $4,000;
doubtful, $4,000.
Block 74-For, $46,5OO; against and doubt
fl J, $50. 800.
Block 71-For, S56,3Oo: against, $50, 500.
Block 52-For, $l03, 800; against. $4,000.
Block 53-For, $1,000; against, $26.600.
Block 75-For, 1914 100: doubtful, $209, 600.
Block 76-For, 500 600; doubtful 1914, 100.
Block 5e-For, $500; against, $4,000.
Block 59-For, Sy6,5O0 against $4,000.
Block 56-For. $4,000; against, $1,000;
BLOCK 81 For, ss11, 500; against, $1,000;
doubtful, 81, 800.
Making total showing in favor of
sewer rage, excluding all against and
doubtful, of SO per cent. Of the taxable
property in Sewer District No. 1. The
three blocks not heard from cannot, it
is estimated, materially change this re-
suit. So careful, indeed, have been the
committees in accepting none for sewer
age that were not absolutely pledged to
it, they have placed in the doubt column
many thousands of dollars from whom
no protest will be heard. There were
many approached who heartily favored
the proposition, but did not care to
place themselves on record or
in any matter commit themselves.
Again, many of the 'doubters"
were not willing to 60 on record in ia
vor of sewerage because of lack of
knowledge of the subject. There were
many of these, aud it is safe to say pro-
tests will go up from very few.
Altogether, the statement previously
made that rs per cent. of the assessed
valuation of property in Sewer District
No. 1 was in favor of the proposition
does not seem to have been far wrong.
WHY NIB. RICHARDS NAME WAS USED
The following communication reached
US yesterday:
To the Editor of THE HERALD.
In your issue of even date 1 see my name
connected with those who are represented
as being in favor of sewerage. / am at q
loss to know how THE HERALD learned my
views in regard to that matter, as have
been approached by no one on that subject;
and, furthermore, as own no property in
the contemp plated sewer district. 1t would
make but little difference to the great pub
lie whether am in favor Of 1t or no.
Respectfully,
Il. P. RICHARDS.
The question was referred to Messrs.
Hill and Colborn, of the committee,
and their reply was: "Mr. Richards is
correct. We did not see him. The
property represented by his name was
owned by him on the 1st of January,
when the assessment list was made up.
Since that time, however, it has passed
into the hands of Kelsey, Gillespie &
Pomeroy, agents, and is now solid for
sewerage"
MR.. WINDER's PROTEST.
In the report of the committee on
blocks 81 and SO, Mr.. ohm R. Winder's
name appeared as among the doubtful.
1t was placed there for the reason that
the gentleman himself could not be
seen, and his son could give no
positive assurance of his views on
the matter. While convinced that Mr..
WlRder Was not opposed to the meas
ure, they deemed if best to take none
but those whose views were positive;
hence the placing OF his name where it
appeared. The following letter, how
ever, removes all doubt.
Herman Hill, Esq:
Dear Sir:-I see by the reports in the
morning papers that you have placed my
name as opposed to sewerage. am at
loss to know how you arrived at that con-
clusion as was never consulted by you or
any of your committee. I wish to say that
I want sewerage for my property on block
IS, and am willing to pay for it.
Very respectfully,
JOHN r. WINDER.
The reading of this letter, prefaced by
the explanation brought forth round
of applause.
OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr.. Fred Simon, chairman of the
committee on resolutions appointed at
the last meeting, reported that the reso.
lutions had been presented to the City
Council, and he had been courteo usly
received by that body. His report was
received.
In response to call Judge Colborn
addressed the assembly for a few mo-
ments. the topic, of course. being sewer
age. His efforts were well received.
Charles Cooper, who lives on the cor
nor 0f S0rfh Tcp,pta opd Ei~ef Wroot