The Grit-advocate., 1904-09-09
Some Misstatements Corrected.

Some Misstatem Corrected.
The Tidings last week continued its
policy OF misreprcsenting facts in re-
ference u the reservoir. That organ
Of discord seems unable to correctly
state the facts in regard to any propo-
slticn, especially one that its editor
opposes. Taking its objections, as ex-
pressed last week. seriatim it will be
seen that there is absolutely nothing
In them.
First: Mr.. Garfield never made a
proposition to the directors to com
plete the reservoir and rent the water
TO the users. When he first began
figuring on building the reservoir he
ut times talked of renting the water 70
district as yet to be organized, but
when he learned that there were legal
complications in the way OF doing this
he abandoned the idea. He at no time
considered the proposition Of renting
water to individual users, as there are
now too few Of these in the territory
to make it profitable to do so.
Second: Mr.. Camfield never offered
to construct reservoir and sell it for
less than 100000 per water right. He
did make an offer to construct 1000
right reservoir for $500 10000, or
$4,000 per right. This price was for
the reservoir and inlet ditch alone,
and did not include outlet bitches.
headgate, and other things included in
the proposition finally accepted by the
district directors.
Third: Mr.. Camfield offered to take
the entire issue Of bonds at par or he
offered to sell the reservoir for u cash
consideration of s35l, 10000 This of
fer we understand still holds good, and
the directors would no doubt have &C.
cepted the cash proposition had they
thought they could sell the bonds for
more tlan 80 cents on the dollar.
Fourth: No engineer other than the
one employed by Mr.. Camfeld has ev-
er made u complete survey Of the res
ervoir site and bitches. The Sterling
parties, who at one time claimed some
sort OF title to the reservoir site, never
made anything but a ny.line survey,
and no legal filings upon the site were
ever made. Within the last week one
Of these parties made the statement to
u representative citizen OF Sedgwick
county that he and his companions
could not have built the reservoir had
they ever been able to perfect their
title to the site, and he stated further
that he was glad that Mr.. Camfeld
had taken hold of the enterprise as it
would no douot be OF great benefit to
Sedgwick county. These parties new
er had any legal claim to the reservoir
aud have nothing to maintain lncourt.
II they ever stated that the reservoir
could be constructed for 100000. 90,
which We very much doubt, it was q
case OF ''sour grapes"
Thus 1t will he seen that there is ab-
solutely nothing in the mess of mis-
statements published by the Tidngs;
they are lot of fabrications orieinat-
against the reservoir proposition, and
rs such they can have but little weight
with the people interested in the fu-
ture development of the county.
Suppose that the gang" as
the Tidings is pleased to refer to
the republican party in Scdgwick
county, does favor the reservoir
proposition, is that any reason
why the proposition should be
turned down ny the people most
vitality interested! We think not.
The republican party, both indi.
viduaily and collectively. always
favors progressive movements
and in favoring this one they are
but following ont their well known
policy. But as matter Of fact
the so-called gang has nothing
to do with the reservoir PROPOSE
ton excepting as individuals.
There are some republicans who
favor the proposition, and there
nre some who do not; equally true
is it that there are some demo.
Gratis who favor the proposition
while others do not. The attempt
of the Tidings to make the issue !,
political one Is simply another
cheap device of that organ of dis.
cord to defeat a proposition the
majority OF the people honestly
favor. We don't think it will
succeed.