The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-08-02

nominate Miller, with q full knowledge
action of the ward CAUCUS
Mckenzie said he wished to have cha
vote Tor Frink not as any reflection ure
Ter, whom he would respect 40 mucli5
ho5v should ne be elected. but he wisp
snect the large body In the First yof
favored Frink. aed.
There was another tilt over thenain-
~ot,rv Mckenzie urging that the Tot al
while Hail, Phillips and walliybody
tanned that the usual style wasimating
though they had no ohjectfshirk an
knowing how they voted, cfwho was
that an attempt was being tas matter
opeu vote. City Attorneyouncil decid.
called upon TO decide, statl Phillips and
for the council to determaull, Mckenzie
ed to call the roll. Call
Wallfneford voted ioder Miller daily
and Twichell voted fcFirst ward. The
The mayor declasuspended to allow
elected councilmaSh he was conducted
rules Of the ceE
Miller to qualiiySs MESSAGE.
70 ms scat " "a the address OF the new
Mbn motion received and
city. Clerbn1ng il the message;
mayor. why Council: In assuming the
placed ono the ONCE of mayor, deem
ffenflswyoHr attention to certain mat
duties vopinion demand your imme-
ftm ~ consideration.
tpre p0oNn TACT tndt grave doubts exist
diatify of the bonds proposed to be is
Fle ofthe late municipal election
sSOr the purpose OF testing the validity
jDnds has been submitted to the super
and Ii now pending in the supreme
Three distinct propositions have arisen
Aection with the issue OF these bonds
Ibid the proposition submitted to the
10 receive the necessary three-fifths vote?
t0nd-The constitution having provided
m Indebtedness TO the extent OF 5 per cent.
the taxable property of the city as shown by
1e last assessment roll could, with the assent of
-hree-hfshs OF the voters, be contracted for
water, hight and sewer purposes. the constitu-
ton being mandatory, does It not follow that
this power must be exercised separately with
referecne 70 each question OF Indebtedness Tex.
cept that the entire indebtedness for all pur-
poses shall not exceed 10 per cent of the taxa
BILE property and in such q manner as Will re-
salt in placing the money arising from the sale
Of these bonds In the treasury of the city as a
special fund, to be sacrediy applied to the pur-
pose for which the same was voted?
Third-The question as submitted contained
two distinct propositions, viz: water and sewer
age. and the voter was compelled 10 vote either
for or against both. No matter how great his
aversion to issuing bonds for sewerage pur-
poses, he could not express il without voting
against the water proposition. No matter how
great might be his desire for water, IL could
sewerage
proposition. In submitting propositions TO the
people which require the expenditure of money
Tor internal improvements, two propositions for
distinct amounts and for different objects ought
not TO be so blended in one proposition that the
voter cannot express his assent 70 one aud his
dissent from the other. The propositions
should be kept so separate and distinct that the
opinion OF the voter may be freely expressed as
- each The case in the supreme court will
decide what is the Affirmative vote required to
be cast In favor of bonds 10 render them legal in
that respect bat in regard to the two last propo-
sftions there is no room for doubt bat that the
proposed issue OF bonds would be open to both
objections and would therefore be invalid. The
slightest doubt as TO their validity would render
their sale impossible.
would recommednd that special election
be called and the following propositions be sub
mitsed to the voters Of the city:
1. Shall she city issue bonds for the purpose of
funding the present Indebtedness?
3 Shall the city issue bonds for the purpose
Of paying for the Yesler corners
3 Shall the city issue bonds for the purpose of
paying for the Rhinehart corner?
1 shall tie city issue bonds for water pur-
posssf
& Shall the city issue bonds for sewer pur.
poses.
These propositions should be separately sub.
naitted and the amount to be voted for each
carefully determined.
II IL not necessary for me to endeavor to i'm.
press upon your minds the imperative necessity
az taking speedy measures 20 increase our water
amply The people are entitled to and must
have sufficient supply Of water at the earliest
possible time.
Fheir convenience, the protection OF their
nroperty and the preservation of their health
demand L. and our duty requires us TO supply
Il Much has been said about the advisahility
q eoinx 70 Cedar river for the source Of supply.
cedar river may have all the advantages
iraed for ii by its advocates. Its water may
3. x,ore and the cost of supplying q certain
~.vsher Of gallons might be less from this than
s,,,n any other source. All this and more may
- tyae. vet the vital question of the hour re-
~..sna From what source can we secure an i'm
-sSliste and sufficient supply The answer is
<,s, fnke washington. 1twould be well for us
:, .,onsIder this Cedar river proposition in con.
-.rstou With our permanent future water sup
~ ana in the construction of distributing
s~ssem this source OF supply should be kept in
st.w I recommend, now. however, that q
,,,u, az rnmpe having daily capacity Of TO-.
- o11 caliona be ordered al once, that brick
numping station Be put in near the present
rro-rs an Lake washington; that the suction
vssss - axfended to where the water has
P.ssta, deptn: that thirsy-inch main b. ex-
ssr.,d nom the pumping station 10 the reser-
vcir ana that committee be appointed. con-
ss.sirr AZ three mem oers OF the council.
n~nesstte Williams and thrsf citifens. and that
III rommittee proceed az once to ascertain
mai rortious OF the city stand in the most
,s.s.ssrv need OF q better water supply: decide
- she location and size OF additional lines OF
49,. and make any further Recommendations
vhIch eaid committee may believe VIII contrib
"a "a t1e end tMxieW. ioax ssss.-.ssa y also