The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-04-27

II one subject.
Valley Railroad Company stands as, the
owner of all the water rights lnyoIxeo.
Jersey Water Company, which was to
option Of buying water. by the million
Which were to have a daily capacity, OF
1000, 900 gallons. delivered partly at low
and partly at high q o ssr ob 80 Wiea a aa iHl
the price per million gallons would nave
been about $S4 The city bought the
works for IS. dO0, 600, Of which s, 100000 is
company has the right 10 sell 2, 5oO, 900 gall
Ions Of his water daily eu5s ame
the townships of Beiieville, south
1 ; = wb;cb East plac orans and ana no ci nfhep,
Newark may supply water. In addition
the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company,
and the Morris Canal and Banking Com
| pany also agreed never to sell water
from any source within the above terri
tory while Newark is making use Of
the ~Pequannock supply. Thus this high 4
wholly appropriated for use within the
limits named after the year 1900;
tb ros h the M ienSeik W Wafer c coripany
used in Montclair and Bloomfield, and
supplies Belleyiile. and in 1894 began to
supply the village Of Irvington. in Gin
| ton Township. but does not supply either
| East or South Orange.
IN 1883 the Montclair Water Company
| contracted to supply Bayonne by Sep
TENDER l. 1880. Bayonne has for years
| adjoins on the south. The company. it
| is presumed, hoped to supply Jersey
city. as well as Newark. by the above
date. Jersey City has not YET secured
a new supply, and when the Newark
| contract was made, as detailed above,
| other interests seem to have dominated
! formed to carry out this work. What.
| ever the cause, Bayonne DID not get
water from the Jersey highlands, ana
| recently contracted TOR a supply from
| wells on Staten Island.
From 1889 to 1892 the East Jersey Water
| Company and allied interests were cnleL-
" engaged in building the Newark supply
| the latter year. sAs this work drew to q
| close. n Newark was getting reaay 70
! abandon the dangerous Passaic; interest
| in a pure water supply revived IN Jersey
| city. Since the latter part Of 1892 Jersey
CITY has three times solicited blas,
norted action this, week, relectea
the proposals subnitted. Two f pwle1
there have been ,, one and ssan once t5a t Roa Iornasl
| watershed, in which source the syndicate
is deeply interested; each time the syHsdi,
| Grst time merely protesting because the
specifications did not. permit this; the
snppiy was called for: the. third time
bidding under specifications Tor q pump
terms. -
Under all three calls no formal propos-
ais were received for q supply outside
these two sources, in which the syndicate
is 20 deenly Interested.
Under the cali of November 81, 1892. the
THAT bid was submitted by Moffett, Hodg
kins & Clarke, of New YORK
for $50. 60 per 1000, 900 gallons, or ST. 60 fer
fhs ger st hi Glty sf BoaTd Of + T Tad u ana c Il
:ens il their private capacity that the
specifications were designed to secure
This proposal was rejected in about sig
weeks.
nv n re sls ? ws. to 0r the sSS0n @so eall, the he
May. 1, 1893; Mr.. 81. J. Kelley also of
fered water from the R~ockaway. setting
faaadga rsse 4 snpp ap0 from ri liz Pa Psss sgiedRaf fSes
I. and tributaries above the Great Falls for
$40. Acceptance of any, of these bids
action was not taken for over a year,
when, on May %, 1894, they were all re-
The third and last formal call for pro-
posals fixed March %, 1895, as the date for
Receiving bids. -Four elaborate sets of
specifications, were drawn up and pro.
methods of supply
As has been stated in previous issues.
these specifications were 50 stringently
drawn IN some particulars, and were SO
ridiculous in others. that only few and
high bids could be expected. The only
two bids received we're the oft-repeated
alternatives of the. Passaic by ~puTnpings
Or the RaekaMay by gravity, subfn nHd "a,
CO. for or as the syndicate, and
the Jersey city Water Company. n
Claims control. both through It's owner
ship Of the. Morris Canal and It's pur-
ohascs Of LAM and water rights for
city supply purposes As has been
iative permission to abandon navigation
on the canal and sell the water supply
ing it. and would have delivered this
water to Newark. 1t is alleged, had not
supply. But for three successive times
the syndicate has not offered this source
In response to requests for bids; instead
it continues to put forward the far less
ward with more or less informally
each time, and at a high figure. Thu
syndicate nevers offers the Rockaway
has a formal competitor outside this
source, and only once more thar ONT
rival, and then two.
On April %, the Street and Water
E to send a communication to the twl
formal and four informal bidders undel
the last call the first paragraph o
! Of the whole has deemed It advisable tt
: reject the proposals for q new water sup
ply as submitted to the board March 16
1886 you are invited to submit q prop