The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-02-09
PAIGE FORCES ROUTED
 IN TAX BOARD
(Continued from Page 1.)

rom HaSG 1.J he said he wanted to get home MT. Phelan said that he understood that the board was to appoint a com mittee to wait on the Hydraulic Go. according to the suggestion of MT. French
 MT French said he did not want to be understood as having said that the hydraulic Co., was willing to receive committee at this time He added: pany has said that if any member was ready to meet it at any place it would gladly meet him. What I meant was that if there is any dissatisfaction with the contract on the part of the tax paying element of the city that there had been plenty of time for them to get together and settle the matter without making this board the goat of the Common Council
 Chairman Dennis E.. OeNeill of the Aldermanic committee of the council which waited upon the tax board last night, and who had been heard prev iously, addressed the board again at this point. He said:
 ''The council has not considered the question of private consumers in this matter. Our appearance here tonight has nothing to do with private con- sumers, but with the city as @ con- sumner. The Common Council does not 
 asked to pay $12. 900 every year for $75 worth of water
 Mir. Vincent asked which council was right, the one that made the contract, or the one that now wanted the item stricken from the list.
 Alderman O'Neill replied: ssWe have discovered -hings in the contract that was rushed through in a hurry. that we did not like. We have discovered at this late hour that we are paying too much for water"
 MT. Phelan resumed his talk and MT. Pierce moved the adjournment. and the motion was carried.
 It was nearly Il o'clock when the water supply item was reached near the bottom of the Second tax district list.
 The Aldermanic committee was heard President Dennis E. O'Neill spoke first. He asked that the appro- prdation be not made. He said there were over 900 hydrants in this city, and if the water used for fire purposes 1 last year had been paid for at meter rates it would have cost the city about | $75 instead of $12.000.
 | Alderman Garry Paddock had a copy of the Nathaniel Greene contract and presented most convincing argument l against the appropriation of the $12,- | 900. He said that if the Fire Com naissioners added 150 more hydrants I this year the hydrants would be ir1- 1 stalled for the purpose of increasing the efficiency of the department. but besides having to pay for the hydrants have to pay $12.50 for each hydrant whethe it was ever opened or not. He quoted a member of the fire board as saying that thousands of dollars l could be saved the city in the cost of l hose every year if more hydrants | I~ 1~I Ix ,+c, | he said, meant better pressure for fire l fighting purposes as long lines of hose | decreased the pressure of the streams | upon the nozzles. The necessity of paying for connections of hydrants, whether used or not and the need of buying expensive hose were factors in ! putting the city at a double expense | that would be unnecessary if the city l was furnished with water free the same as New Haven. Alderman Pad dock said that if the company was obliged to operate under it's charter instead of the contract the company l would be obliged to furnish water free | as is done in New Haven.
 Alderman Eugene I. Meyer, the Re- l publican member of the committee, in- formed the board that the Board ot | Aldermen had voted against the nak- 1 ing of the appropriation. That the agitation against the appropriation
 
 large number of people who did not think it was fair to the city.
 What do you consider the proper thing for us to do?" asked President | French. Do we want to leave the city without water supply?"
 Let the company operate under its charter replied MT. Meyer. eff it did that we would get our water for | hydrants free"
 MT. Cooper asked Alderman Meyer if | he knew that the city under the 18Sf I contract paid the water company $S,- while under the present contract the city received about $1, 500 more than ii paid out.
 Alderman Meyer replied: "What diff 1 ference does that make if we are en- titled to free supply.'
 I MT. Cooper said that he thought ii was wrong for the Aldermen to ask the Board of Apportionment to take the responsibility of breaking the con- l tract He feared a lawsuit.
 Has not the city attorney told us l that there would be no danger of a lawsuit?'' asked Alderman Paddock .'Is it not published in the 1906 year torney, that the power not to renew 1 this contract lies in this board?" l Mr. s. E. Vincent said in part: '"This is a trying situation to place a new member Of th1S DOard m. ma apou' one-half of the members of this body against this proposition. and the othel
 half in favor of it. Now, I can't gc | to either side and learn what to dc in the matter. It seems to me that it is up to me to go at this matter
 as business man should do. I have
 taken up the matter from the time the | Greene contract was made in 1853.
 talked to Attorney James A. Marr who 1 was the city attorney at the time the contract was made. He told me that
 the contract was hurried through the council and in his opinion it was not
 a good contract. He did not think
 the city was suffering from the con.
 tract now, but that bad precedent
 had been established. and the city
 would be the sufferer when it begins
 to grow.
 '.On the other hand. I talked with
 MT. Tomlinson of the Whiting Mfg
 Co.,. and he told me one of the reasons
 bis concern brought their plant to this