San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1893-06-09

The practical question to be de-
| determined is, how shall the re-
m aiming portion of the money for
which we can issue bonds be eX-
| pended? Shall we continue in the
future as in the past, to eXpend it
in driblets and thus deprive our
| selves of owning those convenient
ces and necessities that rightfully
belong to any modern city? Shall
we continue to fritter away our
substance and be forever Deepen
dent on corporations for our water,
or our sewers? Or while it is yet
within our power and within our
means is it not prudent and just
and right to possess ourselves of
| these cOnvenienceS and necessities
that they remain common heri-
tage to the people.
OF what avail is it to make re-
servations in granting franchises
that the city shall have the right
to buy certain plants upon the eX-
| piratiOn of their charters, if the
city in the meantime eXpends all
the money allotted to it by law
and winds up at the expiration of
| the charter without dollar to buy
it with. To illustrate my mean
ing, the city in granting the fran
| chise to the water works company
reserved the right to purchase that
plant upon the expiration of its
charter at its appraised value. The
charter of that company will eX-
pire in about eight years. Now of
what utility is such a provision if
the city persists in dispossessing
itself of the means wherewith to
acquire it?
1t is plain to be seen that by
further delay we are running the
risk of putting the acquisition of
these things beyond our reach. |
trust that no such fatal error will
be committed.
l advocate the construction of
sewers from standpoint of health
and sanitation, and ownership and
control of the water supply from
a standpoint of public economy.
There should be no divided re-
sponsibility between the city and
foutside companies in carrying on
a system of sewers, in which the
city would own the sewers and
| outside parties the water. The
clash of authority would be too
great and too expensive; they
must go hand in hand together
and be under the exclusive control
| of the city.
If the ownership by the city of
| system of water works and sewers
can not be shown to be a great
saving to the city, then the propo-
! sition is not business one and
should not be acted upon. But,
| upon the contrary, if money is not
to be saved thereby to the city and
the people, then l hold that in JUS
tice to the people, the matter
should be submitted to them for
their judgment, and let the ulti-
mate responsibility rest with
them.
Our charter in giving us the
| right to own and control water
works and sewers and at the same
time leaving the vote of money
therefor with the people evidently
contemplates that these questions
should be submitted to them from
ttime to time for their determina-
ton. l am therefore opposed to a
| further reduction of our working
capital by issuing more bonds for
other purposes until the question
of water and sewerage is again
them another opportunity of &C
cepting or rejecting these improve
ments while it is yet in their
power to have them. Should they
in their judgment choose to reject
it, the wisdom and responsibility
of the decision will then rest where
1t properly belongs.
There is no precise data at my
command upon which to base an
exact calculation of the cost of a
system of sewerage and water
/ works such as the city requires
| but from all the means at my
command and from all the sources
of information open to me, l am
satisfied that this city can own it's
own system of sewers and water
works for a sum not to exceed ST.
100000. When speak Of system
1 mean thereby a thorough sys-
tenn of sewers and sufficient water
not only for sewer purposes but for
all purposes as well.
II this basis of cost be correct,
and 1 most emphatically believe
| that it is, then the practical question