The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-11-19
COMMITTEE SCORED
Counse1's Plea For a Writ
to Review Kearny's
Water Contract.
EAST JERSEY COMPANY's POSITION
Jersey City Joins in Asking That
the Writ Shall Be
Allowed.
EAST JERSEY CoMpANY's POSITION

The argument on the writ Of certiorari
sought against the East Jersey Water
Company's contract, to supply the town
ship of Kearny with water. was resumed
last night in Chancery Chambers before
Justice Lippincott~ When the applica-
ton was made on Saturday last on be-
half of William T.. Davis, q resident OF
Kearny, it appeared that Mr.. Davis
objected to the contract with the East
Jersey Company because that conlpany
was bound to Jersey City and hence the
contract with the East Jersey Company
was a bad thing fer Kearny. Mr..
Davis set up that the Kearny contract
with the East Jersey Company does NOT
expire until July, 1897, while the Jersey
City contract is only for one year..
Counsellor Otto Grouse for Mr.. Davis
argued that in view of these facts the
East Jersey contract was unlawful.
Messrs. Collins and Corbin. for the East
Jersey Waiter Company, maintained
that Kearny was compelled to seek a
new supply, as the present source, that
from the Passaic, is unfit to drink
Counsel submitted an affidavit that
Mayor Wanser had advised the Kear-
ny citizens, who called upon him, to
go ahead with the new contract.
MAYOR WANSER'S DENIAL.
But Mr.. Grouse retorted by producing
an affidavit from Mayor Wanser deny
ing that he had ever said so. The pro-
ceedings at that stage were suspended
until last night, when Mr.. Charles L.
Corbin resumed and made a powerful
argument for the disallowment of the
writ. At the present time, he said,
Kearny has no main. The township
tapped the Jersey City main to Har7
rison. By spending $4,000 ON a new
main Kearny can have an Independent
main.
Counsel ridiculed the claim that the
company were laying mains on public
highways without due compensation and
showed in the case Of the Gonsnmegrss'
known as the Atlantic City case, that
a property owner could not start GER
tiorari proceedings in. a water CONTRACT;
that property owners remedy was In
Mr.. Gilbert Collins followed briefly,
directing himself chiefly to the con ten t
tract to Jersey City, she would be la
bic to paying twice over for water
TO PROTECT JERSEY CITY. -
the township and Jersey City. III H.
WIN Sok NAfNAA CO..
could get what they want. I'VE are
bound to Fox and Drum to pay for the
pipe to Kearny. 1t cost $63 S6l and we
owe to-day on that pipe $3.50. Harrison
has left us and now Kearny proposes
to go and we are to pay for that $3.50.
We want to protect ourselves" Coun-
sellor Otto Grouse, for the prosecutor,
maintained hat the action of the COM
mittee was not in the Interests Of the
payers. 1t was, he said, a gross abuse
of power. What is the use Of laying
a main when the township of Kearny
can use n now for nothing?. Doesn't
If your Honor had foresight to see the
end of this matter you would see that
the price of $500 is absurd
Twill the granting of the writ inter
fere with work done by the East Jersey
Company" asked Justice L%ippineott.
yes, indeed" replied Mr.. Collins;
..about half a mile"
Mr.. Grouse closed with a strong appeal
that the writ should be granted.
ca Mgr a Millif% his j plea paY for t9 the pIE issue
of the writ on the ground that Jersey
City had built the main to Kearny
when no other town would do it. Be-
sides, he said, If the writ was allowed
in a few years there would be four
to supply Kearny. At this stage of the
game he said it would be wrong for
the township to hamper itself with a
contract. 1t can get the temporary
jersey city Water Company secures the
contract, not to mention the Hacken-
sack Water Company, there YOU be
sources of competition beneficial to the
township.