Arizona republican., 1906-10-18
Taxpayers
 Endorsement
Continued From Page I.

T. T tive and after several weeks it secured a price in the amount named. It was Mir. Coggins' belief that the price would be too high if there were no conditions which had a bearing on the sale, but there were other conditions, the principal one in his opinion being the long years of dragging and expen- sive litigation. It had cost last year, S25O0 in attorneys fees. and there could be no assurance that it would be any less the coming year The city paid S700O for water last year and has a contract with the water company which runs for six and a half years yet. which calls for the same annual eX- penditure during the life of the con tract. There was also to consider the fact that the plant of the Phoenix Wa ter company is earning S24.000 a year. All these things considered. he cOnsid- II cred it a good move to purchase the plant. II
 Mayor Coggins explained that what he had said might be construed as d II pleading of the cause of the water company. but he wanted it undeTstood J as being a plea for instructions to the | council. He explained that action | might have beerN taken without add vice. but that was not the desire of the council. The matter was so important | that he had deemed it wise to send the following letter to those who were pres | ent:
 '.sThe City Council has selected the | names of fifty men representing the largest business and property interests
 in the city of Phoenix, with whom it wishes to confer in the matter of the proposed purchase of the present city ! water works. You have been selected as a member of this committee. and are urged to be present and give the i council the benefit of your judgment ar | meeting to be held at the Council Chambers, Wednesday evening, Oct. 17th. 1906, at o'clock D. m. After look | ing into this matter for some time, ! the Council is of. one mind regarding it. | but we wish to present the entire mat ! ter. and know that the movement has | the approval of the largest interests of ' the city,
 This letter had been addressed to | the following list of taxpayers. nearly all of whom were present. Frank T. Alkire. T. W. Chamberlain. 1 C. H. Davidson W. C. Foster. L. H.. ! Goodrich. R. H. Greene. Arthur G. Hu- , lett, Charles KOrrick. Clinton I-auver.
 John A. Marshall. Dr. Ancil Martin. H.
 J. McClung. Benjamin c. Pecka. Hen- . ry W. Ryder. C. Nj. Sturges Walter I Talbot, Joseph Thalheimer. F. J. Ben | nitt. p. Corpstein. Charles DeMund. ] Fl. P. DeMund, J. W. Doris. Dr. J. M. | Ford, P. T. Hurley. William B. Lount. l Frank H. Lyman. Selim Nicholson. F.
 M. Mognett. Homer H. McNel, s. l Oberfelder. Eugene B. O'Neiu. James NJ. Shott. Lloyd Christy. c. J. Hall, F. c. Smith. F. s. Wakelin. C. D. Doris NJ. c. McDougall, Geo. A. Cook Harry Diehl. Chas. Larson. \. Goldberg. E. w. Potter. F.. W. Thayer. F. L. An drews, Ed. Rives. N. Diamond, M. Pet tid. R. Wilson. Ed. Eisele, D. Nichol- son. J. Ernest Walker. F. F. Pascoe, F. Irvine. F. M. Avis. L. J. Rice. Chas. Goldman. pr. A. S. Hawley. J. A F.
 Irvine, Walter Bennett.
 Roy Goodrich read to the meeting
 several letters which had passed be- tween himself as city attorney and
 Todd & Co.,. of Cincinnati. who pur-
 chased the bonds. It was his opinion that Todd & Co. were acting in coIiu-
 sion with the water company. to delay matters. He pal dhis respects to MT Sherman in a plain manner, and ex- ? pressed a doubt whether it would be possible to secure from him fair treat ! ment in any kind of a deal. At any
 rate. 1t was his opinion that no agree ment should be entered into with the water company until the city had the money from the sale of the bonds in
 it's possession. A better deal could un-
 doubtedly be made then.
 Eugene Brady O'Neill told of the
 early history of the municipal owner
 ship campaign and of the attitude of
 Mir sherman during that period. MT. O'Nein said that he then believed it would be foolish ever to deal with the
 water company. He would take no
 chances on their sneaking out or away
 He wanted the council to fight the wa
 ter company in the same 'piraticaI
 manner" the city had been fought. He
 would advise the raising Of the ques-
 tion in the courts of the right of the
 water company to use the streets of the new additions of the town. He would place on them a license tax of twenty-five dollars a day to do busi-
 ness. and he had still other suggestions
 to make, which would likely if carried
 to successful close, have put the
 company in the position Of a tanned
 animal He would have it eat out of the city's hand and stand quiet while
 it was being fed. That, however. was
 his opinion of the way the water com
 pany should have been handled In the
 past Now he was ready to take some
 action which would secure water for
 the town. If the water company would make an agreement to sell and stick to
 it, he would be willing 10 see the S15O.-
 900 paid for the purchase of their plant II Walter Bennett was of the opinion that the citizens could not determine
 the question, as it was problem of
 engineering. The great question as he
 viewed it. was what part of the plant
 as it stands today, could be used in
 connection with the new plant. What
 ever is the price agreed upon, of that
 part of the plant with could be used
 in a new plant, should be paid, and no
 more. He did not think the city was Es-
 gally able to purchase the plant at
 the present time. He retained his views
 on the case after the matter had been
 fully discussed, and was one of the
 two taxpayers present. who voted
 against the purchase of the plant.