Waterbury Democrat., 1901-05-04
IT IS UP TO L|LL-EY
Where Was He When the Elec-
 tric Light Went Out.
WATERBURY IS IN FAVOR.

WAAGnOonA Ao IN EAfOHs
 Of Municipal Lighting Yet the Legis- lative Committee Gave Us Black l Eye on the. Subject Said We Were Asking Too Much Why Was Not Representative Lilley, the Watch Dog of the Town Treasury Present
 to Tell the. Members of the Commit tee It Would Be Money Saver for
 Waterbury.
 So the committee has submitted an
 unfavorable report on Waterbury 'ss ap- plicatioR to engage in the business Of
 manufacturing electricity. The board
 of aldermen was very much interested. l in this matter and voted 10 requesf l the city attorney and Repre- sentatlves
 Lilley and Guilfoile and Senator Ken
 nedy to endeavor to secure it's passage.
 After thorough investigation the l board of public works and the alder
 men satisfied themselves that the city l was losing vast sums of money by pllr- chasing electricity from private cor-
 poration and concluded that it would | De a wise move to lay plans to go into, l the business itself Mayor KildufT. l City Engineer Cairns and dozens of our most influential citizens favored I the project and considered it a wise move and thought that no time should be lost in taking hold of 1t But it is| evident that our legislators at Hart l ford do not think that Waterbury has any right to money that is going into the pockets Of q big corporation, and
 we are not aware that our genial ] friend, MT Lilley, who has raised such 1 a furore over alleged waste of money in the town government that ought to go into the city treasury, has said any- thing about what the city is losing on account of not manufacturing itsown electricity. He is credited with being able to secure the passage through the legislature of any measure that he pleases, and inasmuch as it has been demonstrated beyond the shadow of a
 doubt that there is money in this bllsi4 l ness, why doesn't he see that Water bury is put in q position to get it9 One
 of the points MT Lilley and others talked a great deal about was that the taxpayers would profit by abolishing our system of town government, n0 matter how well the town might be managed, because we would De able to dispense with the services of some of our town officials. Perhaps this is true, but the proof in support of that contention is far from being as satis- factory as it is on the electric lighting question. We have figures and the ex- K ample of what is being done in other Cities to show in support of tlie clalsn that we can save money by manufac- { turing our own electricity, while all weS \ have on the other matter IS reckless assertions which may or may not He true More than that, nearly every \ big concern in Waterbury and many of the smaller ones have long since
 grown tired of paying high prices for electricity and have installed plants of their own and make no bones Of tho statement that they can make 1t then1- selves at less than half what they had to pay for it when they dealt with private corporation.
 We have no personal axe to grind with MT Lilley. We have had the honor of an acquaintance with him for many years and regard him as one of our progressive citizens, but we fail to see the logic Of his reasoning when he proclailns that he wants Waterbury to have all it is justly entitled to and at the same time remains passive while q measure is before the legislature that has the endorsement of every ucuiDcI OL iuc clty SUFefuluel4t VE tfH~&. terbury, and which, according to fig
 ures at hand, prepared by practical men, would be great saving to every man in town who pays taxes as we'll
 as to those who rent tenements and
 have to put up with the accommoda- tions their landlords provide for them.
 The same thing might be said req garding the application of the city f0rA permission to build conduits in fle
 public streets and rent them to cor porations and get the money there i8 in the business instead of letting 1t go to private corporations. Other cities
 have taken advantage of these sources of revenue, and as Waterbury needs some means of raising funds other than by direct taxation upon it's sitIzens. why not take hold of these projects? Both measures were approved by the city government, so that no one can say that they were the pet schemes of any particular man or party, and In advocating them MT Lilley would be doing nothing but what people should expect from any man representing the city's interest in the general assembly, much less a great reformer. It does
 not require much courage to attack 5 private individual, but it takes Whoie
 lot of grit to run afoul of corporatjoas with millions behind them, and proba- ply that is one reason why we have
 heard nothing from MT LilIey and hIs
 colleagues about what Waterbury x
 out on account of what it is paying for electricity and so much over what it
 has been losing by maintaining a town government.
 But the electric lighting application
 has not received it's death blow var.
 and probably our friend Lilley will come to the rescue in time to save if. If he does we shall be pleased to give him due credit for any thing. he may do 1 in that direction.
 CUBAN REPUBLIC PRESIDENT. New York, May 4.-In answer to . l telegram sent by the Tribune to r
 Estrada Palma, at his home. in Gen.