Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1908-04-08
Water Company Expects to Begin
Drawing Interest from City,
JUDGE MUNGER TO WRITE DECREE
Table of Expenses EntaiIed since Cree
alton of water hoard shows
Total of scVenty-Fivc
Thousand Dollars,
What the water board has cost the city
90 nr,aha No

Total. ....,......,....,.' 'Sfo'ooo'fo
The United states circuit court Of ap'
Meals at st. Louis has decided that the
nnpraisal of the Omaha Water company
nropertv at Sc 2G3, ,29S.49 is valid and re
mands the case for further proceedings.
These further proceedings are interpreted
by attorneys for the water Company TO
mean simply the entering OF the decree
by the United States circuit court in
Omaha. from which the case was appealed
by the attorneys for the Omaha Water
board to the court of appeals.
''That is all l can see that 1t could
mean" said Richard S, Hall of Hall a
Stout, attorneys for the water company
who was apprised OF the decision IN
brief telegram reading:
Omaha water case reversed and remandcd
for further proceedings. The appraisement
is held valid. John D. Jordan clerk, ST.
Louis, Mo-
"Whfe. OF course, I cannot know the
fun text Of the decision until l receive
copy of IL, / know what the course of
action has been and in the regular channel
Of procedure there is nothing else to be
done but for the lower court to write out
the decree along the lines laid down in
the higher courts decision. ! do not know,
of course, whether the attorneys for the
Water board contemplate appealing the
case to the supreme court or not but |
have no idea of their being successful u
they did. 1t is a great vietory-for our side
and we naturally feel very good over IT.
I'm advance of the full decision l can
say nothing" said John l.. Webster who
with Carl c. Wright, has fought the case
through for the Water board II cannot
say whether we will appeal or what We
will do, for have not seen the decision"
Method of Acquiring Plant.
Asked what procedure would be followed
II the decision called for the decree TO the
water company at this time. Attorney Hall
said: -. 49,
''rhat. OF course, / cannot HAIR. II viii
.depend on the decree. imagine the water
company will begin to draw interest on
this appraisal value until such time as
| the city of Omaha can pay off the bill.
From what date the interest would run
cannot tell until the decree is issued.
whether from the date OF the decree or
| the date of the award, which was July
T. 1906. We don't care now anything about
the bond propostion what we probably
will do will be to get Judgment against
the city for the amount Of the appraisal
and hold on to the water works until we
! get the money That Is wholly a matter
of detail, however and must depend upon
what the decision and decree are. How
soon the city of Omaha will be operating
it's own water plant is not for me to
say"
Takes In whole Plant.
| Asked what proportion of the plant this
| appraisemeht contemplated. Mr. Hall said
he understood 1t to be the whole syrtem,
Omaha, with, South Omaha and its SUI
/ burbs.
When the appraisement was made nearly
/ three years ago, the Water board re-
| iected It on the grounds that it was too
high and that II was not a valid APP
pralsement since only two of the three
! appraisers concurred In It, Charges OF
| Irregularities were also made by the board
| The three appraisers were j. w. Alvord,
appointed by the Water board; George II.
Benzenberg, appointed by the water COM
pany, and Daniel W. Mead, chosen by
these two. Mr.. Alvord declined to concur
in the appraisement, and steps were taken
by the board to secure the appointment OF
a new appraiser, but did not result as
contemplated.
The board carried the case into the
United States circuit court and Judge w
II. Munger rendered a decision which set
! aside the appraisement and the water
company appealed with the present de-
cison as the ultimate result.
End of Tedious Process.
The appraissment was tho elimination OF
a tedious process preliminary to the ac-
qusition by the city under clause IN the
original contract Of The company that
built the water works The plant was built
in 1891 by local capital organized by a
man named Cook. The terms provided that
he should construct the works subject to
certain tests and an ordinance was passed
giving him the contract TO supply the city
with hydrants for fire fighting purposes
for a period not 10 exceed twenty-five
years This ordinance also contained
schedule OF maximum rates to private con-
sumers 10 obtain as long as the contract
held out. Another clause in this contract
provided for the citys pupchase OF the plant
by appraisement OF three appraisers, the
valuation TO be exclusive of the franchise.
The city had an option to institute an
apprasement after the expiration OF
twenty years and before twenty-five years
from the acceptance Of the work as CONF
peted The method Of appointing the ap.
praisers was for the city TO name one, the
water company one and those two 20
choose third
serious dispute arose as 10 the date on
which the elty's option became operative.
The works were actually completed IN 1881.
but were not formally accepted by lho
city until 1888. The company. therefore In
sisted that tho purchase option was not
available until 1903.
Brought 10 Head by BOuds.
The question Of buying WAS brought to
head in 1890 when the city council sub
mitted proposition to vote bonSs In the
amount OF Ss.0a0e0o for the purchaVe OF
the water works. This proposition VAS
ratified by the voters but the question ~
the right 10 purchase held the mattor m
obeyance until 1908. when the ieadslatlTf
was induced to enact law out OF fke
water bill,' which became rather notorl-