St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1894-03-15
THE WATER SUPPLY.
Another Communication From Mr.
Johnson.

it is an exceedingly important question
have decided view of what ought not
to be done, but are not fully persuaded
of the best thing to do.
While am not welded to the Joe's
pond scheme if another will afford us
equal advantages now and in the future,
it mast not escape our consideration.
Thus far / have not been convinced that
a more feasible one has been suggested
1t is true the same burdens the munich
patty with heavy debt, but water of
sufficient quantity and suitable quality
is as essential as the air we breathe, and
must be had regardless of the cost.
While estimates prove that the direct
amount OF taxation IS only the interest
on the capital invested in construction
and rights, reduced by the revenue de-
rived from the same, a conservative
estimate based upon the knowledge of
every voter familiar with our municipal
ity seems to me would convince any can
did mind that our taxes would not be
greatly enhanced. If some other enter
prise costing less can be suggested
whereby we can secure the same privi-
leges and not entail upon ourselves and
posterity uncertain tax of nearly
equal amount, and at the same time not
have our rights subjected to the ayarice
of monopolists, who, not being satisfied
with same, require us to pay a yearly
tax beside the legitimate income of rent,
/ for one would gladly surrender my
pet plan.
Now, fellow-citizens, pardon me
moment in considering the proposition
presented US to sell our water system,
as proposed by the st. Johns bury Aque-
duct Co. They are one with US, inter
ests mutual, or should be, and the mat
ter should be decreed for the good of all.
The St. Johnsbury Aqueduct Co. argue
that the stockholders Of the same pay
about one-ifth of our taxes, being large
owners of property in our municipality
Are they more unjustly taxed than the
man who pays only one-thousandth
part of the taxes?
They have made millions of money
here, and l rel dice in the fact. Is it I'M
just that they should be taxed for one
fifth -! The further argument is that
unless they can, through their manager,
secure certain advantages in this water
question, it might tend to secure their
removal nearer base of supplies. Are we
to be caloled into selling our franchise
by such reasoning? Mr.. Turner said at
the meeting March that as one of the
managers he should not feel justified in
enta1l1ng upon his company such a bur
some perpetual yearly tax as would be
necessitated if made dependent upon the
municipality for water
1t seems to me there is some difference
whose OK is gored." A rich corpora
ton making millions of money, regard
ing it as hardship to bear their pro-
portion of the municipality burdens,
parties on the one hand, asking the par
ties on the other hand. composed OF the
common laborer and the skilled me-
chanic, with nothing but his hands to
gain a livelihood, and the man of small
means and meagre revenue, to bear the
larger burden.
Fellow-citizens, would you for a mo-
ment entertain from stranger capital
lists a proposition to sell your water
system and franchise at nominal price
and exempt a portion of your wealth
and population from sharing with you
in maintaining your public expenses? Is
not this what their proposition con-
templates?
I deprecate as much as any one the
folly of two systems in town of this
size; but no matter what we under
take, obst acles are always in the way,
and in all business we have to meet and
overcome as best we can, and believing
the universal verdict that municipalities
should control their own water system,
we have proposed to buy the St. Johns
bury Aqueduct Co., now admitted to be
worthless except its source and franchise
But at this writing l am not informed
that they consider the proposition ia
vorably. And why not? The only
open argument against it [ have heard
is their absolute necessity of being sup
piled with that peculiar quality of
water. 1t seems evident to me that
should they consent to sell they could
secure by the terms of the contract the
sd me water, at as reasonable rates, as
they propose to impose upon lis. The
fact is, it is the dollars they see in it if
they can induce the village to sell under
their terms, which is the great obstacle
in their way of consenting to sell.
l hear it advocated on the street that
notwithstanding we consent to sell upon
the terms proposed, another party could
secure a charter from the legislatu to
build a plant. How foolish. Suppose
an application should be made to the
legislature. the St. Johnsbury Aqueduct
Company would interpose, and properly.
their objection. Would any member of
the legislature, reasoning that we as
municipal body, chartered with certain
rights and powers, among others the
right to build, maintain and sell water
svstem-would not every member of that
body say that we having done Just what
we had a right to do, we should be
bound by our acts and they would not
interfere. You have made your bed, now
die in it. Such was the verdict of the
legislature of California in a precisely
similar case.
Again, it is represented that the year
ly cost of our present system has been a
matter of large expense, illustrating the
folly of the village undertaking to main
tain and manage water system, and