Milford chronicle., 1891-02-20
Water Works.
Hastily yours
Z. 7. lyon

In last weeks Meas and Ad5efziSet
"Property Holder'' continues his same
line of argument that we picked to
pieces last week. He asks questions
with no relevance to the subjecti but
let him tell his own trouble. He says:
Does the Chronicle think it childish to
keep out of keep? Is a merchant III new
weli-lighted, decorated store, and over head
and ears in debt more trusted and respected
than his old-fashioned neighbor who dis
counts his bills in advance? Are manufac-
turers. etc, likely to be attracted to a town
that is burdened with heavy debt Will
insurance companies take the old wooden
structures on Walnut street at lower rate
if we have water works The Chronicle had
better answer some of these questions, IN
stead of ptating about ear marks, etc.
We will answer his questions. First;
as to debt. Is it right that this gen
Grafton should provide good things,
and pay for them at once, for future
generations to use and enjoy free of
cost? Is It not more fair to encounter
some debt and let the electric light
plant (Which is now yielding a rev.
enue approximating $4,000 per year,
and water works revenues sustain and
in part pay for themselves In pub
lie measure Of this kind, the conditions
are so different from the merchant
and bis store, that the comparison has
no weight whatever.
Second. "Are manufacturers, etc.
likely to come here" etc. That isjust
the point. Manufactures have ex-
pressed themselved on Just this point
within the last three weeks. They
positively will not come to Milford
whileshe has no water works or means
of putting out fires, No sensible man
or company will invest $4,000 in a
town with no fire protection; because
a chance spark, or carelessly thrown
match would start a blaze, and they
would have TO stand by and see their
property go UP In smoke; The manu-
facturers Of this county don't have to
take such risksi there are too many
towns anxious to have them that Will
put in water works.
Third. "Will insurance companies
take risks ?" etc. Why. bless your
dear old soul, yes. They haYe done
this very thing reducing rates,i other
towns on this very peninsula; and in
January one of the leading insurance
agents of wilmington said in our pres
enee that the rates would be reduced
on the business part of the town al
most so per cent if Milford had water
works. Even the Kent County Mutual
would write risks again, we belieye,on
Walnut street property,if water works
were in operation here.
The writer has evidently got an axe
to grind somewhere-may be he wants
TO secure a profitable investment for
himselfas he has lost sight Of any pub
lie benefit to be derived whatever, by
the town owning the water works and
electric light combined. He claims
that he don't want US to go into debt,
but in his next sentence shows that
he is willing to fasten greater load
of debt onto the town than we are ask
ing it to assume. Note well what he
says;
ana in favor ofthe town contracting with
a responsible company to put in the water
works; provided, It can secure good protee- |
ton from fire at a cost not exceeding 81 900 /
per annum, and when it comes to an cleo
lion the Chronicle may ind that there are
others of the same mind as
PROPERTY HOLDER,
We are asking that Milford issue
bonds for $40, 600 to build water works
and own an electric light plant-we
believe that ss5 600 viii complete both.
But property Holdern wants to tax
us 81 ,OOO-the interest on $4,000 at
per cent-for wafer, and compel the
town to continue to pay 81 800 per an
mum to light the streets; which is the
interest on $780, 900 at per cent-or a
total debt Of $4,000 for water and