San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1890-05-31
HITS BACK HARD.
ALDERMAN BOLTON A LITTLE
LATE BUT STILL IN THE RING.
He Plugs Lockwood Dead Centre
Shot - The Windy Alderman
is Asked for Facts.
Editor LIGHT:

from the faCilc pen of the wonderful chan
ccllor politician of our city purpOrting to
reply TO my statements on facts relative
to the finances. condition of our streets.
and the action of certain members Of the
council on my resolution. inquiring into
the amount of street work completed or
uncOmpletpd under the S25O,OOO apprOpri-
alton and the cost of same. as appeared
in the issue of the LIGHT, May I'D, if it
We're not for appearing to my friends as
being knocked out in argument, | would
not notice: for il is so plain 10 any
body that has known of the honorable
Alderman-at-L Large Lockwood for the
past twenty three years that his state
mcntS are those of Il demagOguc, and
there is no reliance to be placed in his
vilifying language. When | state that
on Monday morning the honorable
with me. said that he was going
to reply TO nv statement. but John, of
course you know there is nothing per-
SUnal in it, and then will launch out in
the first sentence of his article and DELHI
eratelv falSify in saying lis 50 full of in
accuracicS and miSStatcmcntS. so evil
IDENTITY conceived in malice and born in
prejudice. that the remainder OF his
etfuSiOn or infusion may be taken with Il
grain of salt. Ny injunction suit that APP
pears to worry the Hon. Alderman was an
act of my own. at my own expense, test
ing the question as Il freeman and an
American citizen. whether the minority
had legal right TO prevent fraud and
an imposition on the part of the majority
who as agents and servants OF the public
| believed and do vet believe were acting
without warrant of law. Anyhow. the
Hon. Alderman Large can rest assured
that shall, like Il dutiful citizen rest sat
iStied with the decision Of the hon
OrabC supreme court OF Texas in
the case and invite the Hon. AL
derman- at Large to remember the old
axiom he who laughs last, laughs best.
Now. Mr.. Editor does the honorable al
derman at large answer my statement
SQuarely? Not one time! He is full of
gcneraliticS and professions, as well be-
come the would be- leader of the city adj
mniStratiOn party. his remarks are frOthy
and there is no body in them. The hon
Orabe alderman at-large tries to follow
in the footsteps Of his leader by emdeaVOr-
ing to claim all the praise for the real eS-
tate boom in our city to the several acts
of this administration and its majority In
the council. Bah. go to. Now if such
wonderful results have been ac-
compliShed in the building of miles
of streets and sidewalks out of the
S25OOOO appropriation, why were the ma
jOrity. the immortal seven, so determined
that neither the public nor the council
should have the information furnished,
as to what has been done and how much
it has cost? 1t may be that, as one of the
honorable aldermen of the council so fire.
Quently said. when the Alamo Heights
company were endeaVOring to obtain for
months from the council a rapid transit
franchise. "There'S bug under the
chip" Gentlemen, to an outsider it does
strongly appear that the expenditure does
not warrant the service performed. AS
for miles of streets and sidewalks COM
plctcd. where are they? If you could
have made a good showing you would
have taken the bait and swallowed
the hook and line, your action in Squelch-
ing report leads one to think and believe
you were afraid to make an exhibit. The
Hon. at Large would have one believe
that all the street Improvements made,
has been done from One-third of the $3.50,
900. Let US see. Mayor Callaghan went
into Office February, 1885, and has been in
office continuous from that date. Under
former administration only $4,000 per
year could be issued in bonds for street
Improvements, no notes were allowed to
be issued by the mayor for current eX-
penSeS-but from March. 1885, the present
administration had monthly notes in ad-
vance of taxes paid, issued at the rate of
ten to twenty thousand dollars per month.
and $4,000 per year, issued in bonds for
five years. eQualling S25O,OOO for street
Improvements. for school purposes $4,000;
for city hall, 100000; for garbage fur
mace. $4,000: for rock cruSher and boiler.
$4,000: for street sweeping apparatus,
5000: for fire houses $4,000 and $1,000
for a steam roller and by vote of the peO-
pie under charter of 1875, another S250,OOO, is
that all? No, in $4,000 bonds for sidewalks
and annual expenditure for the past five
years of about $4,000 per year for labor
and contingencies in the street depart
ment. makes total fund of about $4,000
for streets and sidewalks, $4,000 for
school and Sl5O.OOO for city hall, etc. The
question is have we sufficient improve
mentS on our streets to warrant the eX-
penditure of so much money? Is the
work performed with that reasonable
alacrity that is looked for, when such a
large amount of the public funds are lying
idle in the bank, that can be and is
appreciated for street improvements?
The Honorable Alderman at Large
says: There is an old saying that fig
ureS never lie" but Il have learned dur
ing life that il depends altogether upon
who makes the figures" He further says
that | first quote the interest on bonds at
- and after at 20 per cent. | said that for
the first ten years we paid Is per cent in
terest and sinking fund, and the next ten
years per cent. interest. | will prove it
10 per cent. sinking fund per annum on
S2GO.OC0 equals S26O.OOO in ten years: per
cent. on 100000 for first ten years $780,
600. per cent. interest on S26O0OO (and
while this amount is lying in bank fOl
second ten years $4,000; total paid by
taxpayers $4,000 in twenty years, and
again. unless we get an administration
who will look after the finances better
than at present the $26O.OOO in bank fOl
ten years will be proitleSS to us-if the
S25O,OOO is voted favOrably on Saturday
any SChOOlbOy of ten years can figure