Amador ledger., 1900-09-07
Incorporation and Sewerage.

ED. LEDGER: In previous articles
on these questions l have endeavored
to be fair. To the best of my ability I
have met the issues squarely. 1 have
not attempted to distort the views of
those of the opposite opinion from
their plain and obvious meaning; nor
have l misrepresented their views and
arguments in any sense whatever.
Neither have 1 descended to person
alities, nor made any allusions which
could be twisted into personal refiec-
tions. I regret that those who differ
from me have not seen fit to pursue a
similar course. The issue of incorpora-
tion or nOn-incOrporation is conflict
of ideas, not conflict of individuals.
l may have my opinion as to the mo-
tives prompting some in their efforts
for incorporation; you may have your
opinion as to the moving cause on the
other side; but neither one nor the
other should be injected into this dis
cussion, as both are foreign to the
issue.
In your editorial you intimate that 1
questioned the right of the nOn-land-
lord class to vote on this matter. That
is absolutely untrue. You cannot pro-
duce single sentence that even hints
that way. [ cheerfully mot sadly
conceded their right, and would never
have introduced the subject had not
previous writers on the other side al
luded to it. Why, then, try to create
false impression by arguing point
which no one has disputed.
Again you have conveyed the i'm
preston that those who say that Jack
son is in need of an efficient sewer
system have been accused by me of
slandering the town. l have made no
statement that could by any rule of
Interpretation, be twisted into such a
meaning. l did say, that denouncing
Jackson as a dirty unhealthy town"
is slander. [ believe the majority of
those who have any love of home or
pride of locality will say the same.
The implied slur about landlords
who are too busy collecting rents or
paying taxes to study the question
thoroughly" is beneath notice.
Notwithstanding your ststements re-
garding the cost of the sewer system of
Stockton, do not abate one jot from
my assertion that complete sewer
system for the proposed city of Jackson
will cost S75, 900 for mains, and S25, ,000
for connections at private expense,
You admit that Stockton streets are
not all severed, and that already $3.50,
600 has been spent according to official
records. The official records, however,
take no cognizance of making connec-
tions, which is a material item of eX-
pense when dealing with sewerage.
Now, admitting that Jackson is one
fourth the area of Stockton, that
would give the cost at the same ratio
as Stockton at about $50, 600, with the
system still incomplete, The compar-
ison, however, is not permissible. The
conditions in the two towns are not
parallel. If in Stockton it was found
necessary, in order to secure an even
grade, to bury some sewers from 10 to
15 feet below the surface, to accom-
plish the same result it would be neces-
sary to dig to far greater depth here.
And to blast through the solid bed
rock of Jackson creeks would cost
three or four times as much as digging
in the alluvial soil of Stockton. Name
any competent engineer that would un-
Jackson for $4,000, Where is the
civil engineer of any repute that would
advocate the laying OF main sewers in
the creek beds anyhow? How about
providing manholes with mains buried
in the natural waterways? Can you
point to an efficient system in Califor-
pia or any where else constructed on
such q principle? If mains are buried
in the creek beds, how are you going
to get to the surface again without
eli her making depression in the pipe
line, which would inevitably lead to
clogging, or without exposing a long
stretch of the main sewer to damage
by winter floods? How can you obtain
dumping room in the creek bed with
out constructing dam? Furthermore,
what right has the town to pollute the
creek with it's sewerage? More than
this, can Jackson secure right-ofway
in the creek for such a purpose? Is it
proposed to take possession of the
creek bed, law or no law? These ques-
tions demand an answer before voters
can be asked to cast their ballots in
telligently on the question of incorpor-
alton. r. WEBB.
Horse and Buggy for Sale.
rFha ,sndaprirnad uill coll biS house