The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-01-28
WATER COMMISSIONERS CONSIDER
ING THE RETITION OF THE ST.
PAUL PLUMBERS
ON LAYING SERVICE PIPES.
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY PHIL
LIPS SAYS TT rs DISCRETION
AIRY WITH THE BOARD.
THE CITY HAS DONE THE WORK.
Thought 1t Would Be More Carefully
Handled-BOnds for the Work
Can Be Required.

The question Of whether the board Of
water commissioners shall go out Of the
business Of laying water pipes Is still
undecided. For the past score or more
years the board has held to the opinion
that 1T was for the best interests Of
the city and the citizens owning prop
erty that the laying Of service pipes
from water mains to the property line
be done exclusively by the board. The
work in this line brings to the hoard
revenue Of about $4,000 per year,
and right here is where the complaints
made by the plumbers come in. The
plumbers of the city argue that the
city should go out of the plumbing
business and allow those who are en-
gagged in the calling to do this work.
They contend that, if duly licensed
plumbers can take care of the water
pipes after they reach the property line
and make house connections and do the
plumbing inside the houses, they are
perfectly competent to excavate and
lay the service pipes from the mains to
the property line
The board of water commissioners
say that the one year that the laying
of the service pipes was turned over
to the plumbers, which, by the way,
was twenty-four years ago, the change
was not at all satisfactory. The prices
the board charge the property owners,
they also claim, is simply what it costs
to do the work and no profit is made
The charge for laying the service pipe
from the main, to the property line on
the same side Of the street the main
is laid on is small, but if the lot to
be reached is on the other side Of the
street from that on which the main is
laid, the charge is doubled 1t is not
on account Of the amount realized from
the work that the board has held to the
rule about the service pipes being laid
by them, but for the reason that they
wanted the work done properly and in
such manner that the board and the
city would not be responsible for dam
! age suits which might grow out of the
work.
The plumbers at the last meeting of
the board submitted petition asking
tnat the work now done by the board
IN this line be turned over to the
plumbers. The petition was referred to
a committee consisting Of Commissioner
Hoyt, the city engineer and the cor
pOrat1on attorney, and yesterday Com
missioner HOyt had a consultation with
Assistant Attorney Phillips regarding
the matter. Mr.. Phillips was Of the
opinion that the matter was one entire
ly discretionary with the board. His
idea was that the board, as a part of
the city government, should not remain
| in the business, but allow the plumbers
to do the work. Bonds, making the
! plumbers responsible for any damage
| to pedestrians or vehicles by reason of
J excavations in the street or to any part
OF the water pipes could be exacted by
the water commissioners. It is possible
that the petition Of the plumbers will
be favorably acted upon by the board
at their next meeting, although none of
the members cared to be quoted as to
their future action when seen yester-
| day.