The Hood River glacier. (Hood River, Or.) 1889-1933, 1909-03-11

prove in court, that any responsible
person against whom "A judgment
for $500 or more could be collected on
court execution) has made the state
ment publicly to the effect that the
water as it comes form either of our
present sources of supply is not good
wholesome drinking water or is CON
taminated with any unhealthy matter
80 as to render 1t unsafe for drinking
purposes, and we will pay a reward of
$500 for the name of any member OF
the city council, who In his official
capacity as an officer of the city
makes any such similar statement.
Water systems ale commonly owned
by municipalities for one or more
reasons, viz: to provide system
where none exists, to improve or
cheaper the service, or to provide a
source of revenue for the city, or tor
ambitious individuals who hope to
aud usually do get good percentage
OF the unnecessary part of the cost of
such construction work which is com
monty known as graft In this
case however, the agitation is largely
due to d sire on the part of IA few
active workers, who are asking the
public to advance money for them to
wIeak threatened vengance against
one or two of the members Of the
Light & Water Company.
The information t?) passed to the
public IN the columns OF the Glacier
so far comes from hidden source
over various sorts OF ooguomen, the
owners Of which do not have the self
respect nor self confidence to subsci ibe
their names and have evidently exact
ed a pledge from the editor to hold
the secret dark as an urgent inquiry
failed to bring ont the names of the
authors. There is no demand
for an additional water system as
reports from tho best scientists aud
engineers show tho present supply
has enough good water for 5000 or
5000 people and We editor of the GIa-
cier reported a population of about
2300. or one-fourth of the number
actually provided for by the present
system as it stands.
In recent issue of the Hood River
News the editor states that We admit
not having n sufficient supply of
water. Ihe paper is mistaken,
AS we have never made such ad
mission as 1T is not fact. The sup
ply Is ample for at least three times
present population of the city.
So tar as question OF majority of
one, or : two-thirds vote being neoes
saIy to oarty an election to boud the
city, Wa believe that the two thirds
vote is more in favor of thu small
tax payer. While the large tax pave
has the large part of any tax burden
to bear, it is seldom that the rich or
large tax payer has his home property
sold for taxes. bnt ii Is invariably
the small home owner who has gone
in debt for part of thu puroha Q
price of his home and is depending
upon his days labor to pay his living
expenses and the taxes aud halauce
due. The small tax payer is the one
who suffers from excessive taxation,
for the large holders OF property hsve
many sources by which they can raise
money and almost invarisble pay cash
aud take the benefit of the cash dis
count. provided by law. The safe
guard to the lahoring man, the modest
home owner, is two.thirds majority
vote on increasing Indebtedness in
any community. We have never read
IA record of case where two.thirds OF
any community would not vote for
any necessity, but thousands OF Gases