The Oskaloosa herald., 1899-12-21
Ordinance 2o2.

\
It, that the company snan eapenu
rhirty-Fi1e thousand Dollars for its
Detterment bsfore they can have the
franchise grIpted? If so, then it
should not beIdone, and | think 1t VIII
not require huch persuasion on the
part of the civ, to cause the Water
Company to base from sucn neiariouS
acts.
Does it make the new ORDINANCES
worse than tIe old, to have inserted
in it, that anEprtrs main shall be laid
from the citt 10 the river, insuring
perfect fire Iressure, in all parts OF
the CITY and nmring us water at all
times, dav 4 nd night, and every
minute of thS year?
Does it nike the new rrancnlse
worse than Al old. to have inserted
in it, that wd,hall pay Sixty Dollars
hydrant ren II instead of Seventy
Four Dollars Is it now is?
Does it ME the new ordinance
worse than 4 & old, to have inserted
in it, hatthsRrice ofwater to private
consumers, S.llin the aggregate, be
So, 900 less Pc mnum than 1t now is!
Does it NE the new franchise
worse than tAeold. to have inserted
in it, that vaps shall be placed at
all points VIE water can be trans
ferred. civil double assurance of
abundance water in case of con-
tinued and q ksnsive fires?
Does it n lie the new francnlse
worse than sold, to have inserted
in it, that W nast have good, clear
and wholeso sEater, and that given
us without suse of any injurious
chemicals
Does it me the new franchise
/ worse than bold, to have inserted
| in it, that I'd shy has the privilege
of purchasinN he plant at any time
| it sees fit, du<irgthe life of the fran
chise, and Falue and price to be
decided by Interested parties, if
the city and 4npany cannot agree?
! Does it d zh the new franchise
worse than ubold, for some who do
not understsSd to say that it was
written by Sc Water Company at
torneys, WIFI 81 ii fact it is the fran
chise gotten by the city solicitor
!, and council nd endorsed by the
Water Cong sRF except a clause or
, two, which Bithought best by all
} concerned e lhange in order to
validate mu qsl ownership and to
secure respd sshe bonds?
Does it ID AL the new franchise
worse than usld, because there is
, clause in Pat says, "The Oska-
loooss Waite npany, its successors
and assigns, Al at all times, day
and night, repared to perform
the duties resRhd of it in this ordi-
3 nance and 3 mish water in the
quantity and amer and ofthe quail
: ity aforesaid 1d failure to do SO
or a failure fsfOrm any of the pro-
= visions and Elrements of this
ordinance Y provisions of any
i contracts, latter entered into
by or in bef 80 the said CITY of Os-
Ii kaloosa and ad 0skaloosa Water
70 Company, eessOrs and assigns,
9 may, at the g Of the city council
j. make the co fgliable for damages
to be entore sa 7 an action in the
l. district couf 1oWa, in and for Ma
l. haska count
is Surely it Ter than to have that
't wonderful lure clause that two
or three ind Ia have hean toll
n ing about 81 angely. The above
n, section GOV anything, and pro-
X tects every interests. Gould
the forfeltu g DO more? No.
of Does any hk that forfeitnro
ne clause woui itgationq
II Is anyone b enouob 70 +h;u1
IN that any 90 would give up the
of working inf d plant without :
long anu &c ggle through all
es the courts q indefinite num-
at Der of yeaf adng tbousands 90
q: dollars?
Is the cit kalOosa do,;-o
spending as m money 40 = -, :,
require " 'he water plant
IN oelehu are clause? And
that agalns worth sixteen
Oskaloosa? ''s VI
A damage ssuld not
so hard by g @psny ana
tieo Sa',0i ue Complainant.
anu Will : " 70 the city.
AJAX PAYER.
A lazy Ii Ees
n1aoH RI3|E<<z H.. lazy man !.
DuLo on faiiir, y IS the natural
heNoi lot lazy liver
Z letters.
Remainin 9 for in tho -.
Office at osA Iowa, for : TN me post
ending Dec 'Ae week
eH Vi List
Brown, g Rssl. s.a ank
Belle, Earn ttebsn =
Crookhami sston ~ nali
CLARK, Cha AEsv "m
Fall. j B Isrts' s . IN