The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1909-02-24
Last Thread of Justification of Twenty Year Contract Torn Away by Phelan But Paige Marshals Six Votes in It's Favor, and It Is Renewed for
 Another Year. President Hincks, Phelan, Setzer, Osborne Vote
 With City. Paige, Smith, Loewith, Windsor, French, Sher-
 wood, Vote With
 Company.
MT. Phelan's Reasons For Opposing Twenty
 Year Water Contract

list. Because, by continuing to may be or are antagonizing the peoples rights or wishes. 1 2nd. Because. being in doubt l as to the popular will. we should l take steps to learn it at once, l whilst keeping the contract intact 1 by appropriations until the people say otherwise.
 3rd. Because. the mayor and Common Council. and the people at public hearing, tell us NOT to appropriate any money for such contract.
 4th. Because the Common Council that advises us to break the contract, is an equal power to the Common Council that caused it to be made.
 5th. Because prima facie, it appears the rates charged the city, under the contract for water are excessive, unwarranted and in violation of the COmpany's char ter, containing the Green contract clause.
 9th. Because. in the opinion of
 the city attorney, the contract is held by our Superior Court to be
 conditional contract, requiring
 the annual appropriations of this
 
 year to year.
 7th. Because, by the advice of
 the city attorney, there appears to
 be no legal way of making the
 Water company carry out it's
 charter obligations to the city, or
 the people, except by this board
 refusing to make annual appro-
 priatiOns.
 Sth. Because, it prinla facie
 appears, that since the making, of ,,
 the New Haven contract in 1902,
 this city has paid to the Water
 company in cash, and by tax ex-
 emption, about $225,OOO more
 than it was obliged to do under
 the provisions of the company's
 charter.
 Following the direction of Former Senator Allan W. Paige, six members of the Board of Apportionment and Taxation voted, yesterday, to appro- priate $12,000 for the benefit of the Bridgeport Hydraulic Company. Thus they continued the 20 year water con- tract III force for another year, and postponed for this period the remedies that the water users of Bridgeport wish to apply against the selfish mono poly that they have been combating for three years.
 It was chastened and fearful and fearful water company that was speaking in the Council Chamber this time. It was evident that six votes had been procured in number of ways. but some of them only by the hardest kind of begging.
 Friend w. Smith, who 8 few days ago was warmly in favor of breaking the contract by a reference to the peo- pie. was now of the opinion that the city should proceed softly. Quite plain ly this new state of mind was pro- duced by a belief that the company is repentant and that the contract will be wiped out by an agree ment between the city and the com oany.
 MT. Smith favored a conference with the company. He favored conference } club oyer the head of the company. MT. Smith went further. He said:
 T am authorized to say that the company will meet a committee of the ,ity to talk over this matter. If that s done I believe that anything that is wrong will be rectified.''
 MT. Paige alone made a claim that he arrangement with the Bridgeport Hydraulic company was equitable. MT Smith didn't say that Neither did MT. 4oewit1. Mr. Loewith merely thought hat it was the duty of the Common Council to break the contract, and not he duty of the Tax Board.
 But MT. Loewith didn't venture to ,laim that the city is profiting under he agreement. A yea and nay vote was had upon hree proposals. The first was the proposal of MT. ohelan to refer to the people. This lad been modified to permit the com ,any and the city to rescind the con- ract by agreement at any time prior o the vote being taken. Those who voted for the motion to efer to the people were: Mr. Phelan, MT. Osborne, MT. Setzer l nd MT. Hincks. Those who voted against it were MT. | 'aige, Mr. Sherwood, MT Smith, MT. | oewith, MT. French and MT. Windsor. | A vote was then taken upon the | Shall the appropriation or supply of water be stricken from he list.
 MT. Phelan, MT. Osborne, MT. setzer nd MT. HinckS voted in the affirma- i've.
 Those who voted in the negative ,ere MT. Paige, MT. Sherwood, MT. .oewith, MT. Smith, MT. French and [r. Windsor.
 A vote was also taken upon the mo- ion by Mr. Phelan, that the Tax oard request the Council to name a ommittee to confer with the water ompany.
 It received the votes of MT. Phelan nd MT. LoeWith. MT. Setzer refused , vote. MT. Smith said that when Q favored a consultation between the ty and the company, he meant a con- altation that should be brought about v the Council on it's own initiative he vote upon the resolution showed ainly the traces of the differences etween the Council and the Board of over questions of pre-