The Birmingham age-herald., 1904-09-04
WATERWoRKs COMPANY.
Maj. MlIner Discusses City's Effort to
 Have Company vacate Its Charter.

To the Editor of The Age-Herald:
 I see that the board of mayor and aldermen have Instituted proceedings in the courts to vacate the charter of the Birmingham Water Works company. Is this little prediction thunder, or do they earnestly propose to accomplish a service to the public? Whether correct or not, we must assume the latter. Look ing at it from the standpoint of a water consumer and property owner, l cannot but believe there Is a more expeditions and practicable plan than the one pro- posed to reach a settlement of this i'm portant question.
 Suppose they succeed in annulling the company's charter where will the public come in. How will l get my water bill reduced, and how will I get more fire hydrants and thereby secure better in- surance rates, and when? Yes, when?
 Following the usual course, the proper ty will be placed by the courts in the hands of a receiver and this receiver will In all probability and very properly too, continue the present employees in charge, enforcing the same rates and regulations. Expenses and costs will be largely increased with a correspondIng decrease in the efficiency of management. The extensions and Improvements which have been in progress will be suspended to await the results. Industries looking this way will be warned off by the fact that the only source, from which a ren- able supply of water can be obtained. Is not In position to make time contracts. there being no one in charge authorized to do so.
 We may possibly get a decision in four years, and probably In five, during which fho ratr1NI Ifa at the same old rates, both for water consumed and insurance rates I fear that some of the aldermen do not duly appreciate what these insurance rates mean to the property owners and busi- ness men of Birmingham. The owner of building in which a large drug busi- ness Is conducted, told me that rates on his building, as now increased, had become prohibitory. making 1t necessary for the tenants to reduce their stock and store 1t elsewhere. One large hardware house has spent $7500 to supply as far as possible It's own protection, and these are only samples of many others. Must we continue to suffer?
 The decision being reached and the charter vacated, where do we stand? The city cannot step in and take possession of the property without due compensation and process. Neither can it say to those In charge, You cannot operate the prop erty. The works cannot be stopped day nor an hour, until the public no long, CT needs them, and as long as they are operated those using the water will be. the dancers who pay the fiddler. The city of Montgomery had some experience along this line and finally succeeded in buying the water works, but only at a price agreeable to the bondholders So might the city of Birmingham and pos sibly the suit may perchance be a lever to help us get better terms, If the is- sue be as the attorneys hope. The suit might in that event be a public benefit but if no agreement be reached, the united States court will continue to oper- ate the works indefinitely, just as is now, and has been the case for some years In New Orleans If the city decide to build Its own works 1t need not await the result Of this litigation to begin but even should it adopt this course, 1t will be three years before legislative authority can be obtained, and then three or four more years before the works can be put in operation and take the place of the present works, which are supplying not only Birmingham but aso several other municipalities, whose rights and inter ests will have to be taken in considera- ton.
 I believe it is now generally admitted by those who are conyersant with all the facts that the city made a mistake when it refused, to consummate the trade agreed upon by Mayor Fox and his board for the purcase fo the present works I think time will also demonstrate that they made another error of judgment in not effecting some modification of the terms of the present contract, somewhere along the lines discussed in the Commer- cial club two years ago. The terms then suggested would have given every con-
 
 fourth to one-half according to the char acter of the service; while for the $15. 400 paid annually for 2S0 fire hydrants. the citizens could have had the use of 40 hydrants. an increase of 57 per cent, not to mention the reduction for school and other public uses. But we have already lost frrevocably two years. during which we might have had the benefit of this change and I-renturc the prediction that in 1910 we will still be walking up to the captains desk and settling at the same