Omaha daily bee., 1893-01-07
NEW CITY COUNCIL At WORK
First Business Session Finds Considerable
Occasion for Interesting Discussion.
MAYOR BtMls INTRODUCES SOME VETorS
One Concerning the water Works Company's
Bill for Hydrant Rental Affords Ex-
cuse for Much Dcbate-Failcd to
Pass Over the Veto.

About the first thing that was exhibited was
a display Of temper by Mr. Wheeler.
The contract and bond of The BEE Pub
fishing company, by which IL agreed to do
the city printing during the ensuing year,
was presented for approval.
MIR. Wheeler asked that the contract be
read at length and when the clerk reached
the clause where it said: "Al notices shall
be published on one page, so far as may be
practicable Mr.. Wheeler protested. He
wanted the contract referred back to the
committee He declared that all notices
should be printed on one page, each follow
ing the other, saying that it was difficult
matter for him to sometimes find some of the
publications.
The members gave Mr. Wheeler the laugh.
Mr. Howell said the gentleman might be
correct, but the idea was new one to him,
Mr.. Monroe remarked that THE BEE had
always used good judgment in placing the
city advertisements.
This made Mr.. Wheeler mad and he in
sisted that he never made q statement that
was not true.
No member seconded Mr. Wheeler's motion
TO send the contract back and his scheme
died "a bornin"
The contract was approved Mr.. Wheeler
alone voting "No."i
New standing Committees.
President Bechel announced the standing
committees. and this was the way that they
were made up:
Judiciary, Saunders, IIascall, Wheeler
Finance-Whccler, Steel, Edwards.
Claims-Munro, Bruner, Thomas.
Grades and Grading-Elsasser, Munro,
Parker, Howell, Back.
Streets, Alleys and ulevards-Howell Nc
Andrews, Jacobson.
Public Property and Buildings-Jacobson,
Wheeler Steel.
Fire and Water-specht Prince, Hascall,
Gas and Electric Lights-Edwards, Steel, Nc
Learie.
Sidewalks, and Bridges-Thomas, Mean
Printing GMcAndrows, Saunders. Elsasser.
Sewerage -McLearie, Jacobson Back.
Paving, Curbing and Guttering-Back,
.viaducts and Railways-prmcc, McLearie,
Howell.
Prince, Edwards
Plats and Additions-Parber, Bruner,
Rues--Bruner, Saunders, Wheeler.
Message on the Water Bill.
Upon the subject of the bill of the water
works company, this veto was sent to the
council by Mayor Bemis:
In the appropriation ordinance passed at the
last meeting OF the council is an item in favor
of the American Water Works company cover
ing hydrant rentals for six months ending
December 81, 1892 amounting to s3s,733;4o,
which have vetoed for the reasons stated in
the report of the committee on fire and water
relating to such item. The report referred to
recommended that u reduction of 1920 should
be made for thirty-two hydrants ordered
removed during the month of October,
which should have been removed by Noveni-
her l. 1892. 1t seems to me but Just to the
city that this deduction should be made be-
fore the bill OF the water works company is
allowed or paid. am advised that upon the
submission of the report of the committee on
fire and water IL was claimed by some Of the
allowed and paid, and the matter of this de-
duction could be determined by the new coun-
the city should voluntarily allow and pay the
entire bill, inc luding the 1920 referred to, the
city would be in no position to hereafter make
such deduction. | believe it is proper that
this deduction should be made, and that the
Wa,sE works pr SonP SSomPamyd should promptly
simply these:
About u year ago IL was represented by the
vice. president of the water works company In
view of a controversy between the city and
the water works company as TO whether the
city could order the removal of certain
hydrants on main lines to other lines as inter
mediate hydrants, that the water works com
pany TO the extent OF 100 hydrants would
make such removal, the cost of such removal
TO be paid by the city. document purport-
mitted and signed by Mr.. venncr, the vice
president of the company. Since that time
changes have occurred in the management of
the company and the present management
now refuses to recognize or carry out the
understanding and arrangement made with
Mr.. Nenner. believe IL is both morally and
legally bound to do So and am in favor tc
the extent that we possess the power of re-
quiring the company To do so.
have no desire to keep the water works
company out OF any money justly due it, but
see no other way to assert the rights of tn,
city except by taking this action and vctoinl
this item. In accordance with the report o
the committee on fire and water recomment
that $500 be deducted from the bill OF tn,
water works company for hydrant rentals, anC
that the balance remaining, S3s, ALB 40 at TN,
mar A. O. Ina MI in
preparation ordinance by the comptroller, ant
that the warrants drawn for such amount b'
representatives OF said company upon giviu,
proper receipt IN f4l for the hydran
rentals to and including December 3lst, 1892
Discussing the Veto.
Mr.. Howell was of the opinion that tn
veto should go to the new committee on fir
ana water.
Mr.. Prince did not think that it ever wa
the intention of the company to have 50
hydrants pulled out and put into $40 loca
tions.
Mr.. Steel said that Mr. yenner of tn
company never protested and that it wa
bad grace to make a kick at the elevent
hour
Mr.. Munro insisted that the compan
understood the terms on which the hydrant
were removed.
Mr. Saunders was OF the opinion that tn
city could not hold the water works con
pany and that If suit was brought, the cit
would have to pay the bill.
Mr. Wheeler read the proposition sui
mitted by the water works company las
January, in which it agreed to relocate 10
hydrants at intermediate points
MIR. Hascall claimed that the city had n
authority TO compel the company to plac
$50 hydrnnts in $40 locations, He held tina
when the hydrants Were once in $50 loc;
tion they should always remain in such Il
cations
No chance for the city.
MIR, ,Elsasser took occasion to remark tina
the city never stood any chance with tn
water works company. The city asked fc
certain things but in the end IL did not gC
them without the water works compan
was willing. The company had had its wa
for twelve long years and IL was time thl
the city had u chance Every hydrar
could be removed from the suburbs an
located as intermediate hydrants if til
council saw fit TO make the order.
City Attorney Connell upon being calle
upon for an opinion, said that il was not
question of who had made bad bargain
The contract fixed the price, and by ti
terms of the Venner letter, he sal
that the city could order hydrants change
from one existing main To another; thel
was concession upon the part of the COZ
pany and that concession WAS that II
hydrants could be changed. The hydran