New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-03-30

seriously impair the charter rights the city to
go anywhere in the State for supply of water.
The Controller said yesterday that he feared an
other attempt to fasten Ramapo water contract
on the city will be made after the adjournment OF
the Legislature.
William f. King, president of the Merchants As
ISOLATION of NewYork. said yesterday, in reply to
criticism of members of the Board Of Public I'm
provements:
The Merchants Association needs no recon-
mendation as to character from the Board of Pub
nc improvements or its members The question Is,
shall the city be forced into contract with the
at the rate Of SO per million salons deVered at
the city limits? When the contract with the Ram
nounced that water could be obtained in no other
way. his has been the alarm from the beginning
Of the discussion. The Committee Water Supply
OF the association, after thorough investigation
poets, determined that it was necessary that the
Hence the Morgan bill At the demand Of the
leaders of the majority party, certain watersheds
chance for the BIZ at all What difference does it
make to New-York City whether one shed two,
Is assured Of sufficient water at a reasonable cost?
state at the mercy Of the city? The arguments
asdyanced are ridiculous The Committee on Water
unless the city had the power to take one Of the
main to the city taken away by the new char
ter according to the best legal talent in the city
In the day few months ago the Board Of I'm
contract on the very grounds that the city had no
laid out The work is an object lesson to the tax
PAYERS Of the city 1t will serve TO show them in
an intelligent manner the condition of city affairs
It will be object lesson to the EMPLOYERS of
must work hand in hand Increased cos of doing
business in New,York must come out Of somebody.
employ others and finally out of those employed.
rms is commercial age. Competition between the
Any percentage added in any way the cost OF
form; means a reduction in profits It will not be
the large corporations or trusts that will suffer.
merChantS-thOSe itaI O
s2G0 and upward, they who the bone and sinew
Oh be me city state ana country am in hopes that
there all the week will accomplish the passage of
the Morgan bill
Arthur ]. Baldwin. chairman of the associations
Committee on Legislation, has written to Mr. King
criticising opinion by ex-Judge Dillon TO
Controller Coer to the rights of the city under
the charter TO take from watersheds in the
State. The letter says in part
According to Controller CoIer ex-Judge Dillon
says that the portion of watershed not used by
New York. The language of the statute is: PRO
yided that he (the Commissioner) shall not have
power to acquire any water rights that at the time
Of the initiation of proceedings for condemnation
Of the people Of another i eitT OF the
According 70 the literal language of this section.
sheds of the upper Hudson. for the reason that the
city OF sanatoga is at present obtaining portion
rights are devoted in part to the supplying of n
The Morgan bill, as originally framed was in
tended to correct the ambiguity in this section.
sbe for private water Company r to block the the
proceedings for condemnation by taking portion
of the supply of the watershed for some other
community. To meet this suggestion the Morgan
bill framed. and unless Section 472 does de
what the Merchants Association has claimed for
# then why was al the opposition manifested to
Dillon says 1t does, why should this never have
Why did the Ramapo water Company oppose the
bill? Why was 1t never suggested by any of the