Omaha daily bee., 1889-04-27

ut any time purchase the worho ut their ap-
praised valuation. So much for the first
objection.
Secondly, bond issued on the waterworks
plant would not be, strictly speaking, a city
bond, and would be readily negotiable be-
cause Of the collateral.
Charter limitations as to the amount OF
debt incurred being limited TO ten per cent
OF the assessed valuation would have moth.
ing to do with water bond any more than
it would with a district paving bond.
This much Is true that the city would need
a legislative act to empower it TO issue such
bonds, but that can be had. The only ques-
ton is as to the wisdom and economy of
such measure The Herald confesses to
much surprise that THE BEE has assumed
the role OF obstructonist without discussion
of the subject on its merits.Hordld.
1t is an easy thing TO make assertions
but another thing to prove them true.
The franchise of the city water works
company is embodied in ordinance No.
424, approved June II, 1880. The clause
referring to the right of the city to ac-
quire the works reads as follows:
"The city of Omaha shall have the right at
any time after the expiration of twenty years
praised valuation, which shall be ascertained
by the estimates of three engineers one to
be selected by the city council; one by the
waterworks company, and these two to
select the third provided, that nothing shall
be paid for the unexpircd franchise of said
company
The upexpired franchise refers to the
clause in the contract with the water
wprlyc 1,,.,y ,y1,; al, 1,n ~ ;t,,0
gates itself to pay hydrant rental for
fire protection for the term of twenty
five years from the time of completion
of said works. The contract required
the works to be completed within one
year and four months from the Goth OF
July, 1880. This gives the city the
right to purchase the works on or after
November l, 1901.
There is only one way in which
the city could acquire the works
before that time by paying
their appraised value, and that is by
forfeiture proceedings, in case 1T can
establish the fact that the company has
failed to comply with its contract obi
cations.
We cannot comprehend by what pro-
cess of reasoning city bonds issued for
the purchase of waterworks would not
be city bonds just as much as any other
bond issued by the city. The district
paving bonds are simply mortgages
against the private property abutting
the pavement, and payable, prin ncipal
and interest, by the owners of such
property.
The waterworks bonds would be a
debt incurred by the city for the bene-
fit of the whole city, payable out of
taxes levied against the whole CITY,.
No Legislation can vitiate vested
rights and annul a contract between the
two corporations-the city of Omaha
and the City Waterworlls company. If
| this plain statement of the existing rela-
tions between the city and waterworks
company places THE BEE in the role of
an obstructionist, we are willing to
| have it appear in that role.
The Herald may be surprised that
| THE BEE will not discuss this water
works question on its merits" We con-
fess that we are not in the least sur
prised at the utter inability of the
| Herald to sustain itself in this discus
sion. The Herald scarcely ever does
| know what it is talking about.