Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1903-02-10

company that If we should seter the
pipe connecting what used to be two
independent systems several miles
APART and with no intervening consum-
lers, taking away the western plant, it
would be beyond the capability of hui
imam intelligence to determine the value
lof the part taken or of the part re-
naming.
In appraisals, perplexing questions
are often encountered because there are
many standards of value: but if this
lease presents an 'insuperable difficulty,
| we have come against it. now for the
| first time in the history of men.
i The charter for the Kennebec Water
/ District contained provisions whereby
instructions from the court might be
4 seasonably obtained for the appraisers,
as to the standards of value and the
| principles on which the sum to be paid
should be ascertained. Such instruc-
tons have been obtained. Our bill con-
ltains the same provisions. 1t will be
easy for appraisers to obtain directions
from the court, delivered after hearing
both sides, as to any difficulties that
may be found in their way not cleared
by the instructions given in the Kenne-
bee case. There is no reason why the
Legislature should undertake to make
the appraisal or to declare the princi-
pies on which it is to be made. Those
questions belong more properly with
the court and should be left to it now
as heretofore. They were so left in the
\ Kennebec case and are so left in the
Gardiner bill which the water company
has declared itself satisfied.
1 The water company says it has no
objection to municipal ownership, to
such doings as We're carried on when it's
property at Waterville was taken by
eminent domain or to what is proposed
in the Gardiner bill: it is entirely will
| ling now to give up its property at
Brunswick on such bill as ours if the
! Bath property can be taken with it,
and is even good enough tc offer a. bill
| very similar to ours except that it COM
prehends the Bath and Woolwich equip
ments; but it records with horror and
CONSERVATION from the unprecedented
| iniquity which our petitions contempt
| late. When the petition came for the
incorporation of the Kennebec District,
| the Maine company was of different
| temper. 1t demonstrated against that
proceeding as an outrage without pre-
cedent, denied it's constitutionality and
fought it tooth and nail in the legis-
lature and in the courts to the last
ditch. Some time it may be reconciled
to our bill and have precedent for it,
as it now has in the Kennebec case.
| 1t is claimed that a heavier and more
expensive equipment was placed. in. Wool
witch because Brunswick was to be sup
piled and that the extra cost of this will
be lost to the water company without
recompensa If the Brunswick property is
to be taken under our bill. We do not
think the outlay here considered was
| greater than the growing, city of Bath
reasonably required; but If 1t is fact
that the company has been at any ex-
pense for anything not needed for the
Bath supply or If the value of the prop
erty which we do not propose to take
is to be diminished by the severance of
what we do not take, our bill distinctly
saws we shall make it all good to the
water company so far as the court shall
find an existing loss or damage that We
ought to pay. This is all that the water
company should ask, and it is good
deal to require of the people of Topsham.
The water company cannot see how the
value or the damages in this case can
be ascertained without on the one hand
laying an insupportable burden on us or
on the other, robbing itself.
Somebody, in the estimation of the wa
ter company: must inevitably suffer a
heavy loss. 1t is claimed that our bill
would "cut the life OUT of the present
system. The company is willing to give
up the whole property and offers a bill
for the purpose. They claim that Thomp-
sons brook was inadequate to supply
Bath alone and that the Bath property
had to tap Nequasset or go into insolven-
The fact is that the Bath enterprise re-
0uired much blasting of rock and was
expensive while the Brunswick one was
easy digging. The water company now
desires to retain the Brunswick property
to support the Bath elephant. or to get
rid of the elephant We do not wish to