Bryan daily eagle and pilot. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1909-1918, 1910-04-18
n insufficient water supply in all

an insufficient water supply in al
parts of the city and the entire alb
sence of such supply in large and i'm
lportant localities, notably at Allen
Academy. 1t is also claimed by many
that the water rates are extortionate.
In response to this complaint the city
council recently exacted an ordinance
regulating the charges, but the w. /.
& e. L. company forestalled the en-
forcement of the ordinance by en-
joining its publication. The council
responded by an ordinance to bring
suit against the company for forfeit
ture of franchise because of alleged
delinquency in complying with obi
cations. This action of the council
was reconsidered at subsequent
meeting and is now pending as I'M
finished business.
: Several times during the last two
years when there were clashes be-
tween the council and the company,
the latter has proposed 20 sell its
plant to tho city, but such PROPOSE
lions have not net with favor. Against
this proposition it is alleged: First,
that the plant is not located in a part
of the city where it has been proven
that sufficient supply of water can
be secured; second, that the location
Is such that it is not practicable to
extend sidetrack or spur to it and
the fuel drayage costs every year an
amount equal to the interest on $12 200
at per cent; third, that the machin'
cry, standpipe and piping are old and
out of date; fourth, that it would cost
more to move the plant to a suitable |
site than 1t is worth. In consideras !
ton of these objections The Eagle be.
lieves that majority of the city coun.
Gil, as it is now constituted will not
vote to buy the plant, or if they did
so majority of the taxpayers would
not approve the act.
Furthermore, in consideration of the
fact that the taxpayers of Bryan vot.
&c to establish a waterworks plant
would 1t be right for the city council
to buy plant already established and
in operation at the time of the cleo.
ton (Which is unquestionably anoth.
q proposition) without submitting it
10 another referendum?
II the city had the money it would
be the proper thing for the city coun-
I'll to go ahead and put in a new wa
er, light and sewerage plant, as at
irst contemplated, but since only a lit.
lie more than half of the amount re-
luired for the entire undertaking is t
lvailable 1t is up to the council to do e
he next best thing. There is room J.
or difference Of opinion as to what
best to be done under the circum-
tances. 1t is self-evident that two
plants would not be profit
Die. Moreover, 1t is desirable to
void lawsuits and other complica- r
ions that make for strife and fac
lon. If, then, a satisfactory arrange
lent can be made with the W., |. and Il
J. l.. company to furnish a sufficient B
upply Of water at reasonable price, b
nd to continue the light service, the
ty council could use the $780, 900 now
for putting in a sewerage "
1stem. OF course, before undertake
g this it would be necessary to have
! iron-clad, steel-riveted contract
it'll the company to furnish sufficient F.
alter at reasonable rates, and if the
anagers of the company understand n,
e situation and are good business
en,-which, of course, they are-it
ght to be easy to make such a con- or
act. If, however. they refuse TO a
AXE any concessions, there is moth In
for the council to do but to cut IN
)se from them and do the best pos
Die with the money on hand, sup A
smented, If practicable, by the pro- al
eds of the sale Of the. lot on the thu
rthwest corner Of the city hall of
'ck. =.
While ii is never good policy to do
ustice and 1t is good policy to seek eA'
ice and pursue it," it is not good dit