The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-05-01
THE NEW WATER SUPPLY.
Alderman Falligant in Favor OF
Works in the Southern Extension.


Alderman Falligant, in discussing the
water supply for the southern extension Of
the city, said yesterday that the committee
on water has, in reporting upon the appli-
! cations from the city extension, confessed
| that the city finances do not at present
| admit of the expe diture involved in put
| ting water mains in that district. ut is
| possible he said that the sparsely settled
! present condition of this portion of the
| city may impress them with feeling that
| the revenues TO be derived from water rents
will not, for long time TO come, compeu-
safe for the outlay. | am certain
some outside persons who look
on only one side OF the question. From q
municipal standpoint, as an alderman Of
the city, / think that any public improve
| ment which will cause the southern section
| of the city to be occupied speedily by valu-
able improvements, thereby greatly adding
to the revenues from realty whether By
direct taxation as by tax ordinance, or by
indirect taxation as by water rents, will
prove a good investment for the city,
How about the application to put down
a system of water mains and charge for the
water. as the city does"
81 really cannot tell you what council is
likely to do with this application. There is
a very decided feeling in the present board
that the city itself should have under its
own control all public WORKS, such
as sewers, lighting plants, water
works, water MAINS etc, and
the feeling is a very proper and wise one
The presumption is that in this way alone
can the taxpayers be protected from ex-
cessive charges for these necessities: and
yet we are confronted with the novel an
swer that the water department is very
profitable one TO the city, and the charges
for water greater than the cost of supply
ing it. The comforting result is, that what
we pay in excess for water we are supposed
to save in otner taxation
You mean to say that the council may
neither put water mains in the new extern
sion, nor consent to the landowners doing
it on their account and at their own
expenseN
The alderman laughed, and said: "You
have put the Righteousness of the situation
in very clear light. don't know whether
it ever impressed itself on the minds of
other members of council as forcibly as il
has on mine; but 1T certainly looks as if
when people want water and council can't
afford to give it TO them, they ought to be
allowed to supply themselves at their own
expense il they want to do 50. If this were
the only point involved, permissiol
would no doubt be readily granted:
but the theoretic objection lies in
the apprehension that the proposed
water company is gotten up for the purpose
Of making money out of the people in that
section, aud will demand such compen a.
ton for the Use of the water supplied them
as to make it a practical burden and
monopoly As | understand the situation
1t is entirely in the power of council, if they
saw fit to grant the application, to bind it
with such limitations and restrictions as to
absolutely prevent he apprehended monop.
olistic results
What would you suggestF'
Let US look into the subject little more
deeply. The parties desiring to get water
mains extended through the new districts
have profitable object in view entirely
distinct from the revenues derivable from
water rents That object is to sell their
lots at good prof.. To put water main
IN front of 30-foot lot, aud drainage
pipe from it on the plan recommended by
myself, so the waste water could be carried
off, would cost somewhere between $50 and
500, and would add from $500 to $500 to
tie value of the lot; so that the so-called
''monopolistn would have his water
main and sewer drain paid for and a con-
siderable profit in addition from the al
vanced values of the lot, by reason of these
conveniences connected with it, whilst the
Individual lot purchasers could accomplish
little by themselves individually, and then
only at enormously enhanced figures
what conditions then do you think the
city ought to attach TO its consent, il such
consent should be given to private COM
panyF
II have not given the subject sufficient
study to answer your question fully. Sup
pose, however, that the private company
would agree to put down the water mains
at its own expense, and further agree to
turn them over to the city at cost at the
end of five or ten years, and in the mean
time only charge such rates for water as
the city shall charge north Of Anderson
street, and govern itself by the municipal
practice of not compelling a man or lot
owner to pay for the water unless be chooses
TO take it, do you SEQ any way in
which the ''monopolistn could do
any HARM On the contrary,
wouldn't the city itself be an immense
gamer by having the water maius act as
feeders to prolific lines Of building lots on
which will rapidly spring up hundreds upon
hundreds of dwelling houses, each and all
contributing to make surely and promptly
these very water mains which, at a a given
time, would become municipal property? IL
seems to me that the promise of results as
certain and valuable as those / have indi-
Gated, should excuse council from too hast;y
a consideration of soimportant problem