Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-02-13
CUTTING OFF THE WATER.
A Caustic Letter TO the Commissioner
by Major Richarda.

The Commissioners to-day received letter
from Major A. c. Richards relative TO Can't.
Lusk's report on his complaint, heretofore
Published In TIE STAR, concerning the turning
OF Of Potomac water at his place. Major
Richards alleged that the house had been occu-
pied by District employee, but no action was
taken BY the water department until the en-
ploye had left and Major Richards took Dos
session In his letter Major Richards says: 81
did not state all the facts that came TO nv
knowledge In relation to the shutting of Of the
water supply from house No. So7 E street
northwest, for the reason that did not wish TO
assume the role Of informer, concluding that q
proper inquiry into that matter by an efficient
officer, seeking for all the facts in the case.
would develop the same fully. had no right
TO suppose that the matter would fall into the
hands Of an officer who, by mere stratagem,
followed by disingenuous report
WOULD THEREBY SUPPRESS TIE FACTS
which should have been called TO your atten-
ton.
In view Of the facts In this case and the un-
worthy methods adopted by subordinate of
yours to keep you in ignorance Of the true
status of the same, il 1 may judge from his re-
port made to the newspapers (and have been
informed for Of, NOR have ! seen any other,
facts, that the entire case may appear here.
/. The rules of the water department require,
as l understand, that the supply of water TO
any premises shall be cot OF II the water rates
are not paid on or before August of each
year. 2. The above rule is enforced in some
instances 8. In this case the water supply
was not cut of until after December /.
L. The occupant Of the premises was an en-
ploye of the District. but ceased to be so en-
ployed prior to December. 8. The author of
the report states that the identity of the en-
ploye is unknown to the 'water department"
D. Waving an inquiry into what constitutes the
personality styled the water department"
say that the gentlemen, or some of them at
any rate, whom met in the water Office well
knew the identity of the enploye, as they
named him to me without any Information or
lntimation by me on that point. z. Reading
from book kept in the Office gentleman
then and there IN charge stated that the cause
for cutting of the supply was
LEAK IN THE SUPPLY PIPE"
8. There was no ''leak" in the pipes and the
water was turned on without repair to the
pipes, as they were when the water was cut of.
9. The report in question assigns as the cause
for shutting off the supply unpaid water
rates" 10. The rules of the water department
prescribe fee or penalty in a certain sum in
cases where the water supply is cut off for any
cause arising through default or neglect
fore the supply will be again turned on.
IL. No fee or penalty was exacted or sug-
gested as being due from me, although / made
inquiry If any was demanded, and the supply
was restored within few minutes from the
time left the Office, as il should not have been
had l in anywise been in default
II. The report in question states that the
supply OF water to the defaulting premises is
cut off in regular order" and that in this in
stance it was cut OF as soon as reached 'in
order"
FOR NoN-PAYMENT OF RATE
when the record shows that 'leak" was the
cause.
Finally, the premises are within o stones
throw, almost Of the water Office, and yet il
took five months to reach that point '.in
order" IL it takes five months to reach a
point 'in order" less than a thousand feet from
said Office, when, it may be asked, will the back
districts be heard from.
In view Of the foregoing statement, based on
the facts in this case, / submit that / am not
obnoxious to the charge so glibly stated, of
making complaint that contained reflections
entirely grstuitous and without foundation in
fact" And further submit that the report In
question, as published, is disingenuous, mis-
leading and
UNWORTHY OF AN IMPARTIAL OFFICIAL.
If this matter shall again bereported upon to
the newspapers land 1 hope it may be, and, in
view of the former report, think it should be-
/ trust the inculpated official will have the
manliness to state both sides Of the case and
all the facts, and not pose before an admiring
public in the refracted light of an ex parte
statement made by party in interest.
Trouble About a Dog Fight.
TT