The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-10-18


officer of the Jersey City Water Com
pany?'' asked Mr.. McDermott.
mo. SIR"
did you have any conversation with
any employe Of the Jersey City Water
Company about these specifications"
"No, SIR
Ever meet them?" asked Mr. McDer-
mitt.
'of course 1 did, when we were on the
trip over the watershed replied the
Mayor.
In the letter written by the Mayor to
the board enclosing the draft specifica-
ton. the word f'analysis'' had been in
serted. and Mr.. McDermott shifting some
thing suspicious asked If Secretary New
in had inserted the word: but the Mayor
said he had implicit faith in his secre-
tary and was certain Mr.. Nevin would
do nothing wrong.
INCONGRUOUS MIR. COLE.
"Mr. Mayor" resumed Mr.. McDermoft.
sin your official communication you speak
of certain incongruous reasons given by
those opposed to the Jersey City Water
Company: what were tfey?"
"Oh. well. Frank O. Cole accused GER
tain city officials of being stockholders
in the Jersey City Water Company. He
also charged them with permitting the
East Jersey Water Company to dig up
the bed of the Passaic River near the
Jersey City intake when as a matter of
fact the work was being done by the
authority of the United States Govern
ment.'
Mr.. McDernott switched off into the
question of estimated supply and the
1r;o hx, CHI rnof hocic "a
had figured in forming the conclusion
that the bid of the Jersey City Water
Company was the best.
81 figured on 2O,OOO00O consumed a day.
and that in two years from now the
city would begin to receive the new
water
A COMPLICATED QUESTION.
Showing a calculation of future of in
crease presented. Mr. McDermott asked
an extremely complicated question. as
suming certain conditions of consump-
ton and price with interest at three per
cent. for twenty years, that these being
assumed would not the awardI to the
Jersey City Water Company be dearer
than the offer of the Rockaway and
Hudson?
Mr.. Edwards objected to the question
because it was too involved. the estimate
had not been proved correct and because
Mr. McDermott's assumption excluded
the possible loss of Baye2ne, Harrison
and Kearny.
Counsel became involved in discussion
of the merits of the question when Mr..
McDermott said
"Oh, don't give US a lecture on political
economy"
"This is question of water, not po-
litical economy" corrected Mr.. Edwards.
The Mayor replied that he had taken
| into consideration the question of storage
and he still believes the offer of the Jer-
sey City Water Company the best
THE MAYORS REASONS.
"What other reason guided you in
giving the award? Did you think of the
question of pollution?'
81 did," replied the Mayor; "the source
of pollution, in the Rockaway and Hud-
son scheme were the towns of Boonton,
Dover, Port Dram and Hibernia."
.But the Rockaway and Hudson pro-
posed to take care of that sewage?"
"Yes." added the Mayor, "but didn't
-consiefer they could do SO effectively.
.sWouldn't the offer of the Rockaway
and Hudson be better if the water is the
same quality?"
mo; the watershed of the Jersey City
Water Company is an ideal one.'
| "But the Rockaway and Hudson shed is
the same as the Jersey City Water Com
pany?' asked Mr.. McDermott.
| sNo. sir" said Mr.. Edwards and the
Mayor together
TITS the same water?" insisted Mr..
McDermott.
"No, sir indeed One is from the river
while the Jersey City Water Company
is from the mountains"
/ The remainder of the questions upon
the subject of the capacity and quallty
of the water sheds of both bidders was
| followed by an acrimonious verbal spar
ring between Mr.. McDermott and the
| Mayor.
WILLING TO APPOINT AN EXPERT.
'Mayor' were you requested by the
Board of Finance to appoint an expert,
'Not exactly; but I objected to one
member appointing an expert because
he was opposed to any new supply for
the city at all"
.sWho was that member?"
| Mr.. Edwards objected because it was
privileged. The objection was noted
| and the question repeated.
ssWell was Mr.. John M. Jones'"
sDid you say to Mr.. Detwiller or MI
Simpson that you would not be in favor
of appointing an expert?'
| "I didn't want Mr.. Jones to manlpu-
late the expert. I was willing for an ex-
pert to be appointed although | did not
think it was necessary replied the
Mayor.
.1f Mr.. DetwiHer and Mr. Simpson say
YOU were not in favor of appointing an
| expert, are they mistaken"
eI am not Mr. Detwiller or Mr. Simp-
sons keeper and am not responsive
| for their imagination" sharply SAID rne
| Mayor, and added, you can ask them.
| EXPERT EVIDENCE CHEAP.
| "Could they have secured an expert II
they wanted to without your opposition
Certainly, you can have an expert
to give you an opinion in five days 1
was always willing to appoint one select
| ed by the Finance Board, but not one
who could be manipulated by Mr.. Jones"
Recess was taken at this point until
| two o'clock
AFTERNOON SESSION.
At two o'clock the hearing was re-
| sumed with Mayor Wanser again on the