The herald., 1898-02-01

pany April Is, to begin the examination
of the plant.
April the city engineer filed his re-
port as to the estimated cost of an en-
tirely new plant for the entire city.
April 10 the committee filed this re-
port with the city council. The object of
the committee in desiring to avoid pub
licity of the cost of a new plant was for
the purely polite reason of deprivinS
the water company of the necessarily
large figure representing the cost of
new plant as a basis of fixing the price
upon it's own plant.
The committee wished to secure au-
thentic data on the various items of the
water company's plant from the COM
mittee rather than to guess at the facts
element of the council which urged that
the engineer be instructed to go out on
the streets and by indiscriminate dig
ging find the very details that were be-
ing furnished by the company without
remonstrance or hindrance.
May 10 the committee submitted COM
plete information as to the property of
the water company, together with the
recommendation that the city engineer
be instructed to verify the data sup
piled by the water company, give the
cost of a new plant identical in all re-
spects with the present plant, the pres
ent real worth of the old plant and its
available value to the city as part of
an ultimate complete plant.
July "a the water company offered to
sell its plant to the city for SS,OO0,O0O.
July 20 the city engineer presented his
report showing the present estimated
value of the water company's plant to
be 1908, ,25O, including house connec-
tions.
July 81 the committee was instructed
by the council to offer the company
81, 100, 900 for an option for the purchase
of their plant on or before July l, 1898,
July 2S the water company refused the
offer.
July so the appointment of a consult
ing board of engineers to pass upon the
correctness and feasibility of the city
engineers plans for new water system
in so far as they pertain to portions en-
braced in the headworks system, was
recommended by the committee: also
the beginning of work on this system,
providing no legal objections existed
thereto, and also the taking of immedi
ate steps looking to the settlement by
arbitration of the price the city should
give for the water company's plant
August the city attorney and Messrs.
Lee and Scott, of the city's special coun-
sci, rendered to the council an opinion
tions of the committee, but favorable to
the last recommendation to arbitrate.
August II the committee was instruct
ed to notify the water company that it
arbitration the question of the value of
the Improvements made to the plant.
August 10 the water company said it
could not definitely reply until its legal
adviser returned to the city.
September 7, no further reply having |
been received from the company, the |
city attorney, in answer to the request of |
the council, reported that if the contract
water company cannot be compelled to |
arbitrate until the expiration of that |
contract. At the same meeting of the |
council Mr.. Hutchison's motion pre-
vailed, requesting the city attorney to !
prepare an opinion as to the legality of |
the water works contract of 1868. The |
council had ever been aVerse to assum- |
ing any position that would commit the |
city upon the question of the validity of
the contract. The city attorney and the |
city's special counsel joined in a letter |
to the council admonishing the council |
against insisting upon fiat opinion as
to the validity of the contract. How
ever, a majority of the council insisted
upon the opinion being given, and an
opinion was rendered. II held that those
portions of the contract are valid which
relate to property rights in the improve
ments and increments made by the wa
ter company to the plant originally
turned over to it by the city and to the
obligations of both parties to submit the
value of such improvements and incre-
ments to arbitration, and obligation Of
the city to pay the company the value
thereof so ascertained; and that the
rights of the city arising under these
provisions of the contract can be en-
forced.
Thus the question of enforcing arb-
tration at this time was effectually dis
posed of by the two opinions rendered at
different times by the city's legal ad-
visers.
November % a petition was filed, ask
ing the council to at once take steps to
call a bond election to build an entirely
new water system.
December 3 this petition was consid-
cred at meeting of the water supply
committee, the mayor, attorneys of the
petitioners and of the city, and interest
ed citizens. After full discussion, the
committee agreed to report to the coun-
ell that no steps be taken at this time
looking toward the immediate construc-