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

Mr. Potter: Bath Is still grOwing?
Mr.. baker r It t would a. leave path with
an overloaded plant?
A. Yes sir, think so.
@. And an unnecessary expense not
only in the original cost but in daily
operation?
A. Yes sir.
Mr.. Allen: Did I understand you to
say that if this plant was dismembered
the only saving of expense of the COM
pany on the Bath end would he what
you would save on fuel?
A. Yes sir, SO far as the operation OF
thee paaaat would sSbe concerned Il think.
Ofs caaxxenypn wonAd have to have your
superintendent at Rrunswiek., The ex-
pense OF the Brunswick end would go on
exactly the same But I mean that YOU
would have, to have the same labor at the
@ But you would, not have the expense
of maintenance of the pipe line from the
| back, or wherever the terminus was, in
and through Brunswick?
A. That four miles?
| Q. You would not have the expense of
maintaining that?
| A. No; some years that is not a dollar
| q Or the expense of acquiring water
rights?
| A. / didn't mean to infer that at all.
! You have got still to run your Brunswick
| end. l mean SO far as pumping of the
water-you have got to have the same Ia
Dor.
Mr.. Drew: Are you interested in this
company now?
A. / am.
Mr.. Littleield: Would it cost any more
to operate the works that are there now
to supply Bath than it would if the pipe
was smaller or the pumping station
smaller?
A. No sir.
Q. That is if it had been to simply
supply Bath wouldn't it cost as much?
A. Yes sir, with the exception of the
Interest account.
| Q. That is. it would be the difference
in the expense account of building, but
not In the expense of operating?
a. No sir.
Mr.. Thompson: What do you say was
the size of the pipe between the pond and
| Bath?
| A. Is inch
i Q. And what is the size between Bath
and Thompson brook?
| A. Il inch.
i Q. So that the pipe over to Nequasse1
been for Bath alone?
81 A. Yes sir, but it is not In the same
ratio. 1t would be in the relation of /:
times II and l6 times l6. u times Il is IA
and is times 16 is go
Q. That was the difference'in capacity
but the difference in cost
Il A. Yes sir, that is about double.
j G; The larger pipe would cost consid
cradle more?
A Just about double
O. And your digging would have to bt
a little larger to lay it in wouldn't it?
A. Yes sir, little more lead and il
would cost more to handle it. 1t cost.
about twice as much to lay a l6 inch pip,
as 1t does II inch pipe, and the capacit,
of one is about twice that of the other.
Mr.. Littlefield: Were there two pipes
laid across the river, in order to give
sufficient pipe service?,
A No sir.
@. Or simply to provide in case OF
exigencies?
A. Yes sir. that was the purpose.
@. So that if you supply Bath alone
you would lay two pipes. but they
would not be quite so large?
A. Yes sir.
i Q. That is the purpose of those
r One is large enough to supply?
A. II it is the same size as the pip
i that comes into it. And then of cours'
. you can make repair on shore more
quickly, in perhaps an hour or two
Y whereas in the river it will take con
= siderable time to de-it.' esA"s oo.
:. Mr.. Baker: If understand you, tn,
!. difference between laying the IL incl
Y pipe to Nequasset from the Bath enc
a and the 16 inch pipe. would be abou
double the original cost of the materia
and about double the original cost o
L |
n laying?
81 A. I think so, yes sir.
al @. And would that same ratio apply
| or would some other ratio apply to tn,
! river line running under the river?
t A. Yes sir. about the same ratio.
g Mr.. Marley: I don't understand 20,
t to testify that it would cost no more t,
keep the Is inch main full of water thar
J, a II inch main?
A. 1t takes more water of course.
r @. And it takes a great deal more
steam t. do it?
II A. Yes sir. 1t wouldn't if you wer,
not using it at the other end.
t Mr.. Drew: But would it cost any
more to force two million gallons o.
water through the is inch main than il
t would through the IL inch main?
: A. No sir. think not.
Il Mr.. Manley: But it would cost more
: to keep is inch main filled than il
would II inch main, wouldn't it?
A. Not if you are not drawing il
! | from the other end. no sir.
1 Mr.. Samuel C. Manley, called, testi
fed
i BY Mr.. Baker:
u. You are the president of the
I Maine Water Company?
A. Yes sir.
oil @. Does the company object to NUM-
e cipal ownership of their system here in
Bath and Brunswick if they will take
the whole system and not chop it up?
Il A. No sir.
.. Have you caused a bill to BIZ
drawn which gives the people in the
( different municipalities supplied by this
system the right to take the plant with
the ordinary provisions, and practically
the provisions of the Brunswick bill as
drawn?
n A. Yes sir.
Q. And that bill has been drawn
upon the Gardiner lines?
A. Yes yr.
Mr.. Baker: I will put in and leave
, with the committee the bill, and the
first section gives the key to the whole
Isituation. 1 win ask the committee to
notice particularly Sections one and
thirteen.
Q. In what is called the Kennebec
Water District, which embraces the