Arizona republican., 1903-11-24

| Under the new schedule, Phoenix would enjoy lower water rates than any other city similarly situated in the country. For example. Fl Paso pays $50 per hydrant for A hydrants; Austin 1 s10n per hydrant for the first one hundred hydants, and $50 per year for 67 additional. Laredo, with 200 hydyants, pays s45; Trinided, with 1So pays s6O each. San Diego, with 1s6 hydrants. pays s92.5O for each, and SO on
 But it is not so much a question of cost as of necessity Today. some of the most important sections of the city are practically without fire protection: fire plugs are so far away that the fire department could not possibly convey water therefrom to many of the houses. Citiezns living in the additions that ara deprived of this protection pay the.r due proportion of taxes to the city,
 
 and in addition thereto pay a heavy additional tax in the way of oppressive insurance premiums. They have the right to demand that the city protect them from fire. One of these dayz, some aggrieved citizen will make this demand in a forceful maner Having had to stand helplessly by while his house burned down. he will sue the city for ges-and probably get them.
 As already indicated, the only ques- ton open to discussion is whether the fl additional hydrants, more or less, are needed. And this is a question which the city council, aided by information from the fire department and the city engineer. can very quickly settle. All excuse for delay-barring the impend- ing election-is removed by Superin- tendent Heaps explanation that the water company does not require con- tract from the city for a definite term of years Upon a request from the city for the installation of the hydrants the water company will put them in, at it's own expense, and take chances on thelr being used eleven years. The enti. e transaction will be under the ex- isting franchise of the company, and will be subject to the limitations of that franchise. In the prolonged discussions of the municipal ownership question 1t has been seriously debated whether the city could abrogate contracts under the existing franchise, which has about eleven years to run. But, should the city at a future date decide it advisable to construct a municipal plant, and should it be found impossible to evade the payment of the hydrant rental to the water company until after the ex- piration of the franchise, it would be no fatal matter for the city to be loaded with this additional rental of s615 an- nually.
 Ordinarily, it would be a somewhat pertinent objection to point out that the water pressure hitherto afforded by the water company in its mains has been so inadequate that the protective value of the fire hydrants was a doubtful quan- tity, and it is open to question whether the rental paid for the 59 hydrants we have was for value received. But, prac tically, this is difficulty of the past. The company is putting in new mains. It promises that within a few months more the system will be entirely modern and the pipes capable of supporting all the pressure needed for fighting fire to the best advantage. If this promse is not kept there will be another bond election within year, and ct that cleo a municipal plant. regardles of neccs- sary sacrifices
 Consequently. examined from any standpoint, it is the manifest duty of the council to arrange for such new hydranss as are needed, just as soon az it Is ascertained that the taxpayers at present do not wish to bond themselves for waterworks of their own.
 It is pressing question which is in | no way involved in the municipal own ership contest, except in the matter of | until that contest is decided. l And it is advisable to postpone action only because the election is but three | weeks away.
 Is Congress Representative?
 A writer in a recent magazine asks