The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-01-14
AWARD CONDEMNED.
Expert Rafter Submits His
Report to the Board Of
Trade Committee.
VERaEuLE AND RUGGLES CRITICIZED
Specifications So Loosely Drawn
a Rational Bid Could Not
Be Made Upon Them.
Proposed Water Shed Not Capa..e
of Furnishing The Maximum
Supply Called for.
lERhEULE AND RUGGLES CRITICIZED

| Committee of the Board of Trade to
| examine the specifications prepared by the
Board of Street and Water Commissioners
| the several offers received and the proposal
| of the East jersey Water Company, and
| advise the committee as to the wisdom
| of approving the East Jerseys proposal,
has fled his report. It is a volumnous
document. covering thirty-two closely
typewriter pages. and containing at
least 10000 words. 1t begins with a
lengthy introduction. in which Mr., Raf-
| Ter says that the Instructions he received
from the committee covered very wide
range of investigation, some of which
could not be compassed within the time
at his disposal. He believes, however,
| that his report gives substantially the in
| formation required at this time. Then
ne branches off on SIDE issue and
| says
In studying the Jersey City water case
one cannot but be impressed with the
fact that. in such an enterprise an engi-
problems Which are essentially legal in
! their character as well as eng. .rieering.
anu the engineer runs tangent to the law
! yer al nearly every point. In treating
! the engtneering-legad questions involved.
| u may be remarked there is no intention
q q tab,scusslng tbs us them from the standpoint
/
the man of affairs, who mas necessa rijy
! come in contact with such questions ex-
els. oen1xseiy. .seM w. and who may therefore be still
| considered as having so far as such mes
tlons are involved. q fair mod cum Of
common sense. 1t may be understood
therefore; that wherever legal questions
Adfe iouched upon that the matter is
| 1fnal'' VS. .
oead1 Having thus cleared the way. he pro-
ceeas with his report, the whole KEYNOTE
OF wnicb appears to be that the spee!fis
| eal ons We're so loosely drawn that It was
pPssiRle of fa Pss 70 dsl whether the proposal
adyanlage to the scity.
ne nrst takes up the cases of reservoirs
a.. i,,iu says the specifications were drawn up
Tor any b oder to make aa1 fntelligenf hid
I n speaking OF watersheds he quotes 4ex-
| tenslv9ly from Mr.. Vermeule's t. bles nra-
e. paTed se foT tae State Geological Board, and
CLAIMS that Mr. Vern1euless data hainer
based ON but twelve years experiences K
| observation. 1850 "
Quoting from the late W. H. Talcot, who
mace an exhaustive series Of tables from
1876 TO 1870 on the regions surrollnd;nsr
Lake Hopatcong. Mr. Rafter claims that
| the proposed watershed in the proposal of
tiss,ls Mis E1st Jersey COMPANY. being substan-
italy the same. Mr.. Talcot's tables are Of
more value. Those tables lead him to
conclude THAT the. city cannot rely on less
than etg'ilty1six square miles of watershed
"a for
! daily y water
| Discussing the conduits or pipes. Mr..
ftarter emphatically states that no lam
guage IN the specifications warranted a
slngse pipe bid AS to the purity of the
bids afford pure and Wholesome water
he Claims. that the clause in regard to
bonds is SO loosely drawn that the city
| would not be protected.
| He quotes largely from the decision of
| the Court III the Jersey City Water Com
i pany's case, claiming that those decisions
should nave taught the city the necessity
| OF accuracy in preparing their specifica-
tons. Concerning the question as to the
municipality constructing the work, he
says ss
| there is no good reason why the right to
| condemn should not be granted by the
Legislature. This whole matter appears
| to me to be one Of public policy which
| thus far has not been wholly considered
upon its merits.''
| Mr.. Rafter next discusses at consider
able length Mr.. Ruggles tables as to the
daily consumption of water in Jersey
City and arrives at the conclusion that
there is great waste in this city. Should
the water be metered to private consum-
ers 1t Is his opinion, based upon the
lion gallons per day would be enough for
jersey City.
Mr.. Rafter submits three. estimates for
tons The first is Sc. 400, 900; the cs3n second
IS, ,000 and the third $1,000 600.
He claims that should the. East Jersey
| contract be accepted and the works pur-
chased it will cost Jersey City $50, 600 per
annum to operate the works. Should the
East Jersey Water Company secure the
contract at their price per million gall
Ions he estimates that their profits would
be $257.7S per. year. He claims that the
city has made serious error in the
water question in not preparing the spec
ifications with greater care, and that the
fl7of hos t.Dr rod L. ~
water company's engineers should pre-
pare the plans as a matter of economy
is a 'pestiferous fallacy unworthy city
of the size of Jersey City,
Mr.. Rafter concludes this branch by
saying: 1T is my judgment that with q
sharply drawn specification a considera-
bly, lower price both for their works
themselves and for water furnished dur
ing the rental period will be easily obtain
ed Mr.. Rafter also devoted one para
graph to the subject of filtration, con-
Guiding that at the river as he saw it in
modern filtration as to furnish an unob-
| jectionable municipal supply. AS to the
condition of the Passaic River in time
of low water, he says he has no informa-
tion derived from recent examination .
In conclusion Mr.. Rafter sums up his
| findings in this manner:
~. The specifications prepared by the
Jersey City Board of Street and Water
Commissioners are SO contradictory, in
definite and incomplete as to render
rational DlQQ1ng impossible.
~. The bids submitted by both the
East Jersey and Rockaway and Hudson
Water Companies, under the specifica-
tions are Incomplete and informal and
should be rejected.
(3). The water sheds proposed by both
companies under the plans are satisfac-
tory as regards purity of water, but the
area proposed by the East Jersey Water
Company appears somewhat TOO small to
absolutely insure full supply in the
year of minimum run off.
"a. The cost to Jersey City of water
either for permanent supply when the
works are purchased or for supply under
the rental clause is apparently Somewhat
higher than can probably be obtained by
aration Of general plans by the city and
panies Of q rational specification.
Q). Taking experience abroad as the
basis, there seems to be no reason why
the water of the Passaic River could not
be efficiently purified by filtration.
| The report will be laid before the Board
Of Trade at Its next meeting and If the
Mayor signs they ordinance 1t Will most
likely be taken into the courts.