The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-02-08

 and other city officials who made it had been relegated to private life. He continued:
 "1t has been intimated here that no good results can come from the pass age of this measure.
 lS the memory of some so short that they cannot remember that only one vote was needed in the last ses- sion of the board of apportionment
 to keep this appropriation from be-
 ing made?
 ssWe all know that it is true the city attorney has given an opinion to the effect that the board of appor- tionment cannot appropriate funds in any one year for more than the eX- penses of that year.
 You ali know that we, as the electrive body of the city have the right to undo anything we have done in the past.
 ''We owe it to the people to right 1 this wrong.
 we all know that the Bridgeport Hydraulic Co. is not living up to it's | charter, because of this contract that l it is living under.
 ''Is it right that we should con- tinue to allow the city of Bridgeport 1 to pay SIP, 500 for fire hydrants when the charter of the company it is SUD- posed to operate-dnder says that it | shall furnish water to this city as l | and when 1t is notorious that other cities are supplied with water for all public purposes absolutely free of l charge?
 'Is it right that we should allow these conditions to continue? Are we doing our duty by the people of the city?
 'I say that if you vote against this appropriation that you, are remaining | true to the obligation you took when 1 you entered this body. You took an oath to represent the people. As I ! interpret it, any alderman who votes to keep this contract alive is not true 1 to his duty as an alderman and the trust he should keep with the peo- pfe.''
 Alderman Gould, sometime Repub- l lican, was called to order twice dur ing his discussion, for referring to the water question as party issue. AS a speech, he said, Major Me- Murray's remarks were very militant. He said in part:
 There ought not to be a recurrent attempt to deal with this contract along political lines, when the mat ter has to do with the safety, public comfort and sanitation of the city, There is no fault to be found with the water, or the service being given under the contract. Water costs less here than it does in other cities. Tn private users of water are satisfied as ] well as the city.
 This question, which arises an = nually, is an expression of few, and is not an expression of what the city of Bridgeport wants. It is ques- tion that is built upon certain meta physical and socialistic lines" Here Alderman McMurray objected, and asked that Alderman Gould be ruled to order. He said: There is nothing political about this matter. This measure was adopted by Repub- Ecans and Democrats alike, last year There is nothing socialistic, anarchis- tic, Republican, or Democratic, about this matter, and I hope the alderman will confne himself to the facts''
 Mayor Buckingham said he thought Alderman McMurray's objection was we'll taken. He would suggest that Alderman Gould leave politics out of his remarks and ta k to the question.
 Alderman Gould continued: What spectacle! The board of aldermen. sending a committee to the board of appOrtiOnment to eSk 1t to do some thing it cannot do itself.
 Suppose the Board of Apportion- ment should send a committee of four to meet with us and ask us not to appoint tree warden. They would have just as much right. We as al- dermen, cannot order the Board of Apportionment.
 eff you should succeed in getting the board of apportionment to con- cede to your wishes, in breaking this contract, 1t does not seem that the liability will cease, but that we will pave the way for the city to pay damages"
 Further Alderman Gould said he understood that the city attorney had given an opinion that the contract could be set aside if the board of apportionment did not appropriate the money for the same. He under stood that the opinion was based up- on the assumption that the charter must be read into all contracts made by the city. He said he also under stood that the case of Toomey vs Connecticut was cited in the case But since that time, the alderman said. there had been the Sullivan case, in which a policeman had sued the city relative to salary. ''In this case the Supreme Court said that if the city had bound itself, it was the duty of the Board of ApportionnM mt to meet this fixed expense. I am not here in the role of city attorney but as an alderman, who happens to be a lawyer. and I say to you that I doubt if the city attorney would have the same opinion now as he had at that time.''
 Alderman O'Neill said that he won't ed to say. that the anarchists and some few socialists, who had been referred to as the inStigatorS of the contract were represented by himself He said my idea in presenting this resolution, was to save the city something like $12, 800 for hydrants that do not be- lieve it should p7y for. Even if we should pay for water to fight fires with, don't think we should pay for about 800 hydrants that we never open There is no one who had anything to do with the introduction of this reso' 'ution but myself. So if there is any anarchy or socialism in it, I'm the whole thing''
 Here Alderman Gould wanted to have it understood he had not referred to anyone as an anarchist or a so- cialst.
 What I meant to imply he said, twas that those interested in the mat ter were swayed by Social'stic and metaphysical motives. They right be socialistic and be perfectly logical, but as to metaphysical, it would take sometime to explain, he said what the word means"
 Well there is none of those things in this,'' calculated Alderman O'Neill, Alderman Gould asked Alderman O'Neil if he would be willing to have the board of apportionment vote not to appropriate for the hydrants. if he was sure it would break the 20 year water contract.
 'It would be. a good thing" replied Aide rlran .O'Neill
 Alderman Fletcher said he had voted