Marshall County independent. (Plymouth, Marshall County, Ind.) 1897-1902, 1899-08-18

Before the electric light bids were
opened Monday three things came up
which are worthy of passing notice.
| The city attorney made a report con-
cerning the Hess-Shunk controversy of
last winter; right to leave gravel pit
for the city's use was granted, and a
petition for a cement crosswak acted
unfavorably upon.
Attorney RollO 0glesbee gave his
opinion to the effect that J. A. Skunk
could not legally draw wages as city
attorney, inssmuch as he never had been
raised to that dignity. Nor could he
successfully demand recompense for
serving the council as special attorney,
though the council as matter of justice
might pay him for his services. Mr..
Skunk is of the opinion that this in no
way is the end of the matter.
The gravel pit to be leased is that be-
longing to Hiram Shsfer and is the best
one in this county that could avail
| Plymouth in any convenient way.
II A. Chase, Joseph Swindell and
others who are building cement walks
along their property in South Plymouth
so as to conform with that lately placed
in front of the Webster building, asked
that cement walk be built by the city
to connect the two stretches of walk
just referred to. Councilman Reynolds
made motion that brick crOsswalk
be laid instead This motion was sec
onded and carried.
The contract bids, with a $500 bond
attached, for lighting the city were
opened and read. Only four bids were
filed and all were very close in their
figures.
The first bid read was that of VIM.
Nj. Everly, of our city, who submitted
the following figures in round numbers
(spsce will not permit us to print each
contract in it's entirety): SO arc lights,
all night, S75 per year for ten years.
The Famous CO., of Chicago: S72
per arc light, per year, for ten years.
James Murry, of Pennsylvania: S75
per arc light, per year, for ten years.
Mr.. Murry failed to attach a bond
and his bid will not be considered.
M. w. Simons, of this city, the pres
ent contractor, offered to light city for
S75 per arc light, all night. for ten
years.
Mr.. Everly submitted three bids, two
of which had clause attached where
by the city could become the sole owner
of the plant in five or ten years. The
first, at the end OF five years. by abb
tration-Mr. Everly 10 choose one man.
the council to choose another; these
two TO select the third, and they to fix
the price. The second proposition was
q gift of the plant to the city at the end
of ten years.
Mr. Simons, through his representa-
tive, Mr.. f. A. Rea, of Chicago, pre-
sented to the council lengthy propo
sitiOn, with blueprint drawings, where
by the city would take the plant al
once and operate it; and at the expira
tion of ten years, for the consideration
of 81, to become sole owner-he TO re-
ceive $50 per arc light, per year, during
the ten years. He agreed to remOde
the plant and equip it with all the lat
est improved appliances, including the
new inclosed arc light.
} The rates for incandescent lights
were various and differed considerable
Mr.. Everly gave two scales month
and meter rate-the former at 40c pei
month and the latter at &c per hour
meters to be used wnere practical.
Mr.. Simons has prepared a sliding
scale, whereby the consumer is given a
discount on meter measure, ranging
from to so per cent, according to the
amount of light consumed.