The daily morning journal and courier., 1902-02-14

 contract endeavoring to show that they were not to the advantage of the city As to the schedule, he had nothing to say. He thought there was reduc- ton to families living in single houses' and it would appear that the water
 company would have $5,000 less on that
 account but this was more than made
 up for in other rates. He thought that
 under the continuous contract the ar
 bitrators would sooner or later put pfl-
 Vate citizens on meter rates. lie sdlu
 that the reference to filtration was merely q sop thrown out-there was no
 agreement there The managers Of the
 Water company were as good citlzens
 as there are ill New Haven, but the
 contract contained no guarantee that
 they would remain such. The city ought
 to farm out such a contract without an agreement to govern the quality as well
 as the quantity of the water
 Concerning the compensation that the city is to pay for all the promises or the
 company, he referred to the clty
 agreement to save the company harHl-
 less from the franchise tax, or pay TOT
 water used for public purposes at meter
 rates less 25 per cent. He thought thar the company should pay for the use or
 the streets for pipes. The time was coming when these companies would have to pay franchise taxes and to pay for such uses of the streets. The mode
 of taxation would doubtless be changed | in twenty or twenty-five years and no one could now see what the mode or taxation would then be. Then the peo- ple would have to pay for the Water
 company, or pay for water at retail rates The Westville school district
 pays $20 per hydrant, and the city at 1 this rate would have to pay S19,42O, within $5S0 of the rate the city would pay for all purposes under the minority
 recommendation, and besides this 70 per cent. of meter rates for the water. Ihat amount cannot be accurately estimated. In a hundred different ways in the con- tinuous contract were elements that cannot now be determined. Good busl- ness men would not enter into that con- tract for ten years, let alone for all , time,
 As to the right to purchase at the end of twenty-five years he said that the par value of the stock was two and
 one-haIf millions and to-day 120 was being offered and refused with no talk
 CTS because there was a probability of this continuous contract going through.
 This generation would never have an- other opportunity to purchase the com pany's property Hardly anyone would
 admit that city affairs were conducted on such strict business principles as the
 business of the Water company. TO put this through all the best legal tal- ent in the city was being employed and he would say he was not being enl- ploved and was perfectly willing to be
 outside the best pale of the best legal talent on that score. Not a single ma terial point in the continuous contract
 had been modified since it was first con- sidered.
 At this point Councilman Farrell asked, after MT. Elliott had been speak ing nearly an hour, how long each mem
 Der was to be allowed to speak, Every
 one should be given chance. Presl- dent Harkin replied that each member
 could speak as long as he pleased. MT. Elliott continued and said that under the continuous contract the city
 surrendered for all time all vested con- trol it now has over the Water com many. 'Gentlemen are you willing to
 surrender your constituency for sixteen cents a, head? Let any one rise who is.n Four times as much would be paid for water under the continuous con-
 tract as would be paid if the city 1 bought the company's property. Lets do business for the city of New Haven the same as we would for ourselves, pay for what we get and get pay for what we give We can't do it under this contract We may for time get water free but we or our posterity will pay more than it is worth.
 MT. Elliott closed at 12 o'clock after l having spoken little more than an I hour. | Councilman Mason, a member ot the l committee who signed the majority re- port, was the next speaker He said 1 that the franchise, length of time to purchase, cost to the city, cost to the consumer and length of time of the con- 1 tract were the five points to be consla- cred He spoke upon each of these ] points and on the cost to the consum- l CTS said that all the real estate people l like the continuous contract because It l brought down the cost to consumers. One prominent real estate man said II l brought the cost to his clients down D per cent. and that was quite an item. He considered that he was sent here as l a representative of ward and ms ward wanted the continuous contract. In his personal opinion the continuous | contract was the better True there were some things in it which should be 1 changed but even at that it was better 1 than the ten year contract, which only provided reduction for stable rates and l how many people had stables, More | than that it would make the city pay 1 SEQ, 900 per year. He said that he acted 1 largely on the corporation counsefs ] opinion in his consideration of the con- l tract.
 1 Councilman Farrell favored the ma 1 iority report because that committee l had reported progress so far as it went i and he did not think that the city could l now sustain the burden of purchasing
 the company's property.
 l Councilman Wells read a written | speech, in which he opposed the con- 1 tinuous contract He spoke for thirty l five minutes, closing at 12:40.
 1 The next sneaker was Councilman