Omaha daily bee., 1897-01-03
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
Majority and Minority Reports on the
Howell Investigation.
BOTH ADMIT THE CHARGES ARE PROVEN
Minority Recommend His Dismissal
Bnrber Claim shcIycd for Good
Mayors veto of water Works
Extension Sustained.

The anticipated double report from the
special committee that has investigated the
charges Of official irregularlty made against
City Engineer Howell was presented at the
adjourned meeting OF the city council last
night. There was no material difference be-
tween the two reports in regard to the evil
donce. Both reported the facts to be as
charged but the minority report, signed
by Hascall and Duncan, recommended the
dismissal OF the city engineer, while the ma
jority report, signed by Taylor, AFFORD and
Bingham. made no recommendation at all.
Action was deferred until 10 o'clock Monday
forenoon, when it is proposed to have a
full council present. The following Is the
minority report:
RECOMMENDED DISMISSAL.
The evidence taken by the committee on
the investigation Of the charges fully sus-
tains the charges, but has brought to light
state of facts that shows the existence
city of Omaha in trouble, litigation and eX-
pense not to protect the rights of the city,
nor TO- ACQUIRE anything that VIII po,ci.s rs
and conspirators 10 blackmail and plunder
honest business men having legitimate DuSl-
city and that have advanced and spent
large sums of money for the development
and welfare of Omaha, UPON the faith ana
the city would protect their investments
and deal honestly with tlcm. The evidence
develops that r. II. Howell Is one of the fac
tors in the conspiracy. lie sought the Office
of city engineer but with secret stipula-
ton made with the mayor that he might
resign the office at any time should lie sue
ceed in being made general manager OF the
water works In Omaha.
He testifcs that his father resides In De
troit Mica, is lawyer and has been as
wood; that said Underwood at one time
was associated in business with g IL ven
ncr. and that his father and said Cnuer,
wood were mixed up in the litigation Of said
Ncnncr. who was opposing IN the thlten
States court the foreclosure Of the liens of
the bondholders on the water works plant
He admits that he has perslstently sought
the position of general manager and that
sence, he went east as far as philadelphia
and New York and was gone two weeks,
aurmg wniGf g H. timG ne S4ug;nr 1g;nr connanv S and
solicited them to give him the management
of their water works plant in Omaha.
IGNORED COUNCILS ORDERS.
II Is in evidence that on october 6, 1896,
the city council passed a concurrent reso-
luton, introduced by Councilman Wheeler.
and that was approved by the mayor Oc-
tober Q, requiring said Howell as city en-
gneer to figure out and make calculations
and estimates of the present value of the
water works plant, and ascertain what cX-
tensions. If any. were necessary to be made
TO the same ard report his acts and md;
before December /, 1896; that he was pres,
ent in the council chamber when said
Wfeelef introduced Silu ltSplutlplls any
when the same was being read said Howell
remarked to Mr.. Hunt superintendent
or tnS COMPANY t tb roloion ni no smicIenf ex
PLANTATION being given for making a remark
of that character. Said HowelIs testimony
shows that he made no calculations upon
which 10 base value nor did ne figure
out or make any estimate of the value of
said water works plant or OF any part
thereof and made no effort to ascertain
what extensions, II any were necessary 10
De made to said plant, nor did he make a
"A required by said concurrent feSO-
tuition. Yet in his pamphlet addressed to
the mayor, signed by him as city engineer;
December and is part of the evidence taken
in this investigation, he makes the follow
'7It should be stated that the chief factor
of the American Water Works company
of $l,COO,OOO of preferred stock of that com
pany were invested in the works, in addi-
tion TO the amounts heretofore stated
Extrinsic evidence does not uphold this
contention. BY eXtrinsic evidence is meant
independent estimates of the value of the
plant in question"
no Independent estimate of the value of
the plant, and that no such estimate eX-
isted he must have promulgated this false
statement, as he did at the private meet |
ing of citizens called together by the |
mayor to consider the water works propo- |
sitiOn for a sinister purpose. 1t Is evil |
dent that he made the statement to deceive |
the public and to bolster up other false |
statements made by him in connection |
!
tend to complicate the business relations |
existing between the said company and the !
city of Omaha. In his interview with f., l., |
Bierbower, on the 9TH day of October, !
1896. shown by the testimony of said |
Blerbower, he appeared to be very anxious |
that the company should have fun recog- |
milton of its property rights in the water |
works plant. and be protected I'm its con- |
tract with the city; SO much so, that he |
wanted ;. l.. Wiley made one of the direC-
tors of the company and be put upon its
pay roll. that the company might be con-
ceded its rights, that all contention be-
tween the company and the city might
cease, and that all matters in difference
might be smoothed over Yet, in said
pamphlet he argues that the company
should not in any manner be recognized
as possessing any rights i'm Omaha, and
asserts that the company has no contract
with the city for hydrant rental water
rent, and advises that none be paid or
allowed
The question arises what caused this
sudden change of feeling, desire and opin-
ion?' If he was so anxious in October to
have the rights claimed by the Omaha
Water company recognized, why does he
oppose recognition of the same in Decem-
ber? His presen mt hostile attitude his ultra
ana radical views, and his expressions of
wrong thing to deprive the city of it's
rights are. not evidence of an honest pur-
on his his pa part but go to sustain the
company and Is playing his part as a con-
spirator,
ONLY A HALF DENIAL.
. IL Is true that he denies that he had the
Interview with T.. l.. BieTbower on October
Z 1895, as detailed by said Bierbower in
his evidence, but admits that he did speak
to him on the subject, I'm a general and
casual way, and without urging the mat
ter. In July preceding But II must be
that this investigation was
Instituted because he denied at the time
the charge was made that he ever had any
such interviews with said H.. L. Bier
bower, or with any one else and that he
never at any time mentioned or suggested
the matter to n. l.. BerbowCr, MIR Hunt | ,
or any one else connected with the com
pnny. The particular day upon which the
alleged Interview took place did not enter
into the essence of the charge made 1t |
appeared to be the universal sentiment of |
the meeting at which the charge was |
made that an Investigation should be had.
ana ir II was found that he was guilty of |
approaching the company with proposals
10 lts manager, as charged, he should |
without delay, be removed from Office. 4
The evidence Of Mr.. Hunt superlntend- y
ent OF the company corroDorates that of I
Mr Berbower, and further shows that I
said Howell approached Hunt with prop- 7
ositlon relative to the same subject mat a
ter. The evidence of MIR. Heth another
witness, cG-roborates the evidence given i
by both MIR. Bierbower and MIR Hunt
Either all three of the witnesses swore I
falsely, or II. II. Howell Is guilty as ! u
'harged The standing Integrity and hon b
,sty or Mr.. Bierbower Mr.. Hunt and v
n this city. :,