The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-02-12
Paige delivered the goods.


 l Paige delivered the goods.
 This is the story of last nights meeting of the Tax Board. Friday night the board adjourned in a panic, six members favoring the 20 year wa ter contract having discovered that they lacked strength to renew it's odieus provisions for another year.
 One vote was needed Two votes -providentially arrived Providence and Paige usually work hand in hand. It was so in the General Assembly, when Paige was the costliest star that ever shone in a legislative sky. It was so in the Common Council in 1906, when the infamous instrument was created in haste and indecency. The vote was eight to three. s. Loe- with and S. E.. Vincent joining the majority.
 Six were votes of Republicans Two were votes of men who were put onto the board as Democrats. and whose vote for the contract was cast against the direction of the party which had honored them with positions of trust, but had said to them. in platform ut terances extending over three years, that the Democratic party believes the 20 year contract to be an instrument injurious to the people, @ dishonor to the city. and something that should be terminated.
 But Paige delivers the goods.
 What, when Paige is busy, is the solemn order of a party, solennly made in the presence of a hundred thousand people. to a member of that party honored by it with place. When Paige gets busy things hap pen.
 Especially do things happen in the corporation ridden Republican party, for after all even Paige could not pro- cure the assent of a majority of the Democrats on the board. If MT. Pierce and MT. Loewith, so- called Democrats. voted not to renew the contract for another year. John J. Phelan, Za1mon Goodsell and Stephen F. Osborne. who are also Democrats voted against it. and Mr., Phelan. in straightforward speech. declared that the city of Bridgeport is entitled to a supply of water for public pur- poses free of charge. MT. Phelan also showed the continu- ance of the malodorous instrument ] means through 20 years a loss of about $1, coo, 900 to the city.
 1 But all his truth. his eloquence, and his justice, did not prevent Paige from 1 delivering the goods.
 The stage had been carefully set. The attempt to write the appropriation ! into the list without vote having l been detected. the item was politely ] removed.
 Then Mr. Cooper produced a contract made in 1882 with the water company, i to which contract MT. Phelan was a party,5 representing the city. With much eclat it was indicated that this contract did not provide for free wa l ter.
 So much of the drama was wasted, 1 4Iry responded that the rates in that con 1 tract were as low as any city enjoyed in 1882.
 The right of, New Haven to free water. he said, began in 1901. The right of Bridgeport to free water did i supplied with free water in 1882.
 This bomb exploded with a pop, City Auditor Keating was staged. He was permitted to take the burden of the contract upon his own shoulders.
 '1 did not expect to mak a speech" " he said, as he pulled from his pocket l a large bundle of notes, from which he made an address that had evidently been carefully prepared.
 His defense was that the terms of 1 the 20 year contract are better than any terms the city had before ob- i tained.
 That this was so MT. Phelan had al-
 
 He affirmed it again, in his remarks | in rebuttal. saying: "It was not the l duty of the committee to make a bet ter contract. but the best contract This city is entitled to a supply of water free of charge. The people of this city expect that the property of this company should be listed at it's full value.
 'T believe that MT. Keating and the other members of the committee meant to do right, but they are wrong.'
 After hearing MT. Keating, two members of the board. whose position was known to be that they favored a renewal of the contract, became ''con- verted.''
 Incidentally arrangements have been trade. it is said. with portion of the press to describe the auditors speech as great white light
 As a matter of fact the speech, as an explanation of the 20 year instru- ment, was much inferior to the report which the committee made to the council, when it recommended the con- tract.
 That report was carefully considered and consistently put together and is 1 probably the best defense of the con- tract that will ever appear, yet it con- tains abundant evidence that the com l n1ittee was exceedingly unconscious of the true import and effect of it's work.
 
 after the vote had been taken, and it was determined that the contract should be renewed for a year.
 s. E. Vincent then produced a let ter from the company. The substance of the letter was this: The company will not confer with the city about the contract. The company is much l annoyed because there are people who do Lot like the contract. The demon strations against the contract must positively cease. Otherwise the com pany will demand a lawsuit 1 Inasmuch as the action of the Tax Board barred the possibility of a law suit ever the contract for at least a year the sardonic humor of the letter | is evident.
 The one fact that stands out clearly | is that Paige is not "dead one." He can still deliver the goods. His ar gur1ent for the contract was positively | the ablest argument in favor of that | instrument he has yet made
 It is to be regretted that the meet f,,U af In to rd