The San Francisco call., 1898-02-27
WILL. THE VETO
 BE FINAL? Water Rates May at Last Be Fixed by the
 Courts.
A Doubt as to the Value of Councilman Henneberry's
 Resolution.
Pressure Being Brought to Bear on Woodward to Change His
 Vote.
Oakland Office San Francisco Call,
 90S Broadway. Feb. 26

90S Broadway, Feb. 26.
 Indignation over the action of the majority of the Council in fixing water rates has given place to calm thoughts, and now the people of this city are busy collecting legal opinions regarding the validity of a resolution and the value of the Mayors veto when at- tached to a water-rate ordinance.
 thorough study of the water rates as fixed by the committee after proper consideration and taking of testimony and the rate as arbitrarily fixed by the Henneberry schedule shows that ac- cording to the water companies own figures they will receive in the event of the infamous job being eventually sue cessful nearly twice the income they received last year. One proprietor of many blocks has figured up that the income for the allied companies if they have their way will for the year com mencing July 1 be not less than $500,- 900. The significance of this can be understood when it is remembered that the very highest income ever received by the Contra Costa Company when it owned the entire Council and had no cOmpeuIOr was put S4U4,OUO.
 Yet, in the face of this statement the agents of the companies are still de- claring that Oakland should be gen erous to them because it is good thing to keep them both in the field.
 Mayor Thomas has stated in to-day Call that he will veto the ordinance when it comes before him and there is some doubt as to whether his veto will be effective or not in killing the meas ure. The consensus of opinion of sev- eral attorneys, including that of City Attorney Dow, is expressed in the fol- lowing facts:
 The State constitution provides for the fixing of water rates by municipal bodies, but makes no mention of the authority of the Mayor in the premises. It also provides that under proper con- ditions cities can frame charters for their own government. In the charter by which Oakland is governed to-day is a section providing that all ordinances must go to the Mayor for his approval or rejection and that if he does not take action on such ordinances within ten days of their final passage they become a law by reason of their passage by the Council.
 The water rate ordinance which will come up for final passage next week will be sent to the Mayor and he will veto it. Not being able to secure the necessary eight votes to pass the meas ure over the veto the ordinance will be killed. The agents of the water com panies declare that in such an event the Mayors veto will be of no value because the Council is authorized by the State constitution to fix the rates.
 This view of the matter is contro- verted by several attorneys. They de- clare that if it be optional with the Council to fix the rates by resolution or ordinance, that having taken the ordinance method. the ordinance must go through the proper form of pro- cedure as prescribed in the charter, and if vetoed by the Mayor is a dead letter.
 Then the question arises that, the ordinance having been disposed of, will the resolution which has not yet been rescinded and which was passed last Monday night hold good? City Attor- ney Dow advised the Council before vote was taken that any attempt to fix rates in such method without taking