The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1898-11-03
ALL FAVOR IT.
The City Ownership of the
Water Works Plant
Desired by the Business Men Of
Topeka.
COMMERCIAL CLU b
FavOrs an Issue of Bonds to
Buy It.
Discussion of the Question by
the Members.

The business men of Topeka last night
put themselves on record as in favor OIL
the municipal ownership of water
works by adopting a resolution favoring
the authorization of a bond issue for
such purpose.
The resolution as originally introduced
also specified 1.-The acquisition of the
plant of the Topeka Water company at
its fair and equitable value and the
necessary extensions and betterments
of the present system by the city
This was cut out by an amendment,
and as adopted the resolution simply
stood for the authorization of a bond
issue for water works. The resolution
was introduced by Mr.. H. V. Hinckley
and the amendment by Mr.. D. ]. Green
Wald.
The meeting last night was under the
auspices of the Topeka Commercial
club and was for the particular purpose
of discussing the water works PROPOSE
ton. A number of business men who
are not members of the Commercial
club were present as we'll as large
representation of the club.
Mr.. S. H. Downs, chairman Of the
committee appointed to investigate the
municipal ownership situation, read
supplemental report at the opening, the
meeting substantiating the report made
a
followed by Mr.. Hinckley, who at the
close of his remarks offered the resolu-
ton placing the business men on record
as favoring the authorization of a bond
issue and the acquisition of the present
plant. Mr.. Hinckley said:
1T is gratifying to notice that the
deeper our committee digs into TINS
matter the more arguments they find
which are favorable to municipal own
ership. At the last meeting of this club
Mr.. Joab Mulvane, posing as tax
payer and only as such, censured the
city council for precipttat1ng the bond
proposition upon us at this time. The
council has naturally become exasperat-
ed by the endless litigation with the
Water company and have asked the
voters to authorize a bond issue not eX-
ceeding $4,000. The council does not
ask the people to direct a bond issue Of
that amount or of any amount but
simply asks that the people put the
council in such a position that the city,
rather than the Water company, shall
be master of the situation. This cleo
ton Will not issue bonds nor precipitate
a debt upon US. 1t will simply say to
the council, We are ready for municipal
ownership. Issue the bonds when you
need them The idea of the city build
ing an entirely new plant must be con-
sidered only as bluff. If attempted
the city would be enjoined. AS I said
a week ago there will be no construc-
ton of new works unless the council
should be forced by the Water company
to that extremity, and fail to see how
such an emergency could arise for both
the ordinance contract of 1881 and the
water works law of 1897 provide that
existing water plants may be acquired
and that if city and company can not
agree as to price the district court shall
settle the matter; however, the council
has evidently attempted to provide for
any emergency that may arise. I have
no patience with people who intimate
that this action Of the council indicates
JObbery. If the city council does not
command our confidence to such an ex-
tent that we are willing to put them in
control of the situation, unhampered,
or if our district court can not be de-
pended upon to establish the fair and
equitable value of the water works, if
called upon to do so, then the city
as a municipality, had better go out of
business"
When the question was put on Mr..
Hinckley's resolution, Mr.. Edward VIII
der took up the discussion and spoke
for some time in opposition to the is
Suance of bonds. He said:
The thing I should like to know is
whether the resolution gives the council
power to issue $4,000 bonds to either
purchase the present plant or build a
new one, or to place 1t in a position to
deal effectively with the present com
pany in arranging satisfactory rates.
We are just getting through with con-
siderable Indebtedness on account of
paving. 1t seems to me that it is fool
iSh to burden ourselves with $40 900 of
bonds in order to do things ourselves
US. think these public utilities as they
are called, you can usually get done for
you reasonably and without mourning
burden of any kind. I feel that it would
be better to bond ourselves only for the
things we can't have done, instead of
bonding ourselves for something that
can be done for US and at the same
time stimulate private enterprise. If
we issue these bonds it will be a long
time before we can forget them and
they will stare US in the face every time
NT.a- E1T- H.
provement I firmly believe that it is a
serious mistake for US to multiply pub
lie offices. I hope to live to see the day
when there will be only half as many
public officers as there are at present.
1t is the curse of our political system,
and why we should increase the num-
Der by the municipal ownership Of pub
lie utilities, / can't understand. If we
could vote these bonds in such a way as
to place the council in a position to deal
effectively with the eastern bondhOIders
and to arrange for the satisfactory ar
engagements of water rates and extern
SiOns, I would be emphatically in favor
of doing so. But if by voting these
bonds we place permanent burden on
this city and by doing SO, simply re-
duce our water rates few dollars, I
am most decidedly opposed to the pro
position I think every tax payer in the
city would be injured ten times q S
much by voting these bonds than by
continuing to pay the present rates, and
I appreciate that the rates are excess
SiVely high ana should be reduced
Mr. c. J. Evans followed Mr. Wilder
He said: Il rather think the report of
the committee is just a little mislead-
ing, and too favorable to municipal
ownership in regard to cost. There is
| however, some advantage from fnan-
ciaI standpoint in municipal ownership
| That advantage is measured by the
/ credit advantage Of a city over a pri-
! vate corporation. We are under obliga-
| ton today to pay in some form of inter
est on the present plant, and I hold that
/ there would be no especial obligation or
/ liability by the issuance of $440,0 of
I bonds. The form of the liability would