The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1909-09-02

City Vi AAJOO0 iHIdDlIdhtSi tttdb the
total value is a sum of money which
would earn six per cent on the invest
ment; that he is advised that it is earn
ing $4,000 90 per annum, net, and up
on this basis it is worta $500, 900. 90 that
to make it do this $O,OOO.OO to $4,000,
should be spent in building high
pressure reservoir above the old reser-
vOir.
The supply of 1,0OO 900 gallons from
the pumping station cannot be consid-
cred. Nobody is so foolish as to say
that Johnson City wants to get water
supply from pumping station when
the way is open TO own a gravity sys-
tenn. This only leaves the $50, 600 gal
Ions from the old reservoir to be con-
sidered. From Mr.. Blevins' estimate
the 2,250, 600 gallons will supply 22,5OO
people, it must follow that $50, 900 gall
Ions will supply one third that number
or 1900 people. Johnson City already
has population of about u, 800 peo-
pie. We expect it to be $4,000 or 80,
600 within the next ten years. 1t re-
suits that the water supply does not
fit the city unless we want to get it by
a pumping station.
A careful examination of the Blevins
report shows that he avoided fixing
any value on the "water and water
rights"
Major Dunlap in his report says, in
effect, the quantity of the supply from
above the old reservoir is controlling
on the question of the Water Com.
pany's rights; that at the Soldiers
Home intake, on good authority, the
lowest is 274,OO0 gallons, which is only
about half enough to supply the Home
He says: "We could not expect tC
secure any flow of water from the
mountain section of the Creek in very
dry seasons! He declines to fix any
value on the water and water rights Of
the Company.
If the National Home must have
800, 600 gallons daily and there areonly
274,OOO gallons at the intake in dry
weather, it is difficult to find in thai
locality anything like adequate supply
for Johnson City and the failure of thu
reports to fix value for water anC
water rights is as good as could bC
done for the Water Company
In 1893 when the Johnson City Wa
ter Company was attempting to tax,
100000 gallons from Sinking Creek
above the old reservoir, for the Nation
al Soldiers Home by a suit in tn,
Chamery Court at Johnson City, tn,
Watauga Water Company in its plead
ings, under oath, said:
GAS said Sinking creek was then be
lieved to be, what has since been dem
onstrated, the water source of nearly
all the springs in the valley below al
far down as the large reservoir, and "a.
said creek in the summer and fall sea
sons does not afford half million gal
Ions of water daily-the minimum
amount compliments alleged waite
contract calls for-and as the diversion
of said stream from Sinking creek val
| 70 hn
creek valley would not only destroy
respondents main supply of water fo
its reservoir and ruin its plant, and re
Spondent being lower riparian owner
as it owned the reservoir farm below
and all water rights on the w. S. Har
vey farm, nearly one mile below thu
point of the contemplated diversion
this respondent did join Alice L. Clay
and Thomas Lilley in bringing chan
Gerry suit No. q"
vt is difficult to see where Mr.. Blew
ms can find even the supply of 75O,O0C
gallons for the old reservoir in dry
weather. When the facts are seen it il
unquestionably very much less. Thi
is certainly true when the supply TO
the Home is taken out. We must no
forget that the Watauga Water Com
pany did not include the Johnson City
Water Company's plant. 1t Offered
no basis of dividing the supplies be
tween the two. Nothing more can b.
said than that under such circumstan
ces and conditions no value can be fix
ed upon the water and water supply.