Bryan daily eagle and pilot. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1909-1918, 1910-03-02

plans and specification. wnen the coun-
ii did not know the plans could be
used. ! opposed
Fountain tells want to buy this old
plant at $4,000, the price offered by
the water company. have never sug.
sested the purchase OF it at any price.
My family being almost the largest
taxpayer in Bryan II is not reasonable
that ! would rob them TO benefit the
water company. Fountain introduced
resolution 20 sue the water company
for no. mating n certain annual re
port. Il passed and | vetoed IT, Foun.
tain then had il passed over my veto
and he was appointed to employ coun-
ell to bring the suit and TO this good
day he has not reported to the council
that he has employed a lawyer and
for the very good reason that the law.
yers would not take the case on con-
tlngent fee but demsnded $500 cash
and contingent fee; and all this be-
cause there was no merit in his case.
Had there been any warrent or mer'
II In she case Il would long since have
been with the jury.
Fountains only object was 10 set
something ON which TO misrepresent
me to the public.
The water company has on many
and many occasions failed to comply
with their contract and In the face OF
my advice that suit for forfeiture of
franchise was the proper course. the
honorable alderman now aspiring for
the mayorship would not act. told
the council that the council could com
pei the water company 10 come In and
show cause why the water and light
rates should not be reduced. and with
all these chances 10 distinguish him
self as a defender OF the right OF the
people he has failed 10 give any re-
lief TO n long suffering public, but al
lows the matter to lax that he might
ride into office on an issue that is
based on no part Of any fact as to
what stand for in the city OF Bryan
relative 20 the water Company.
The water company should be made
to pay for every violation Of a public
trust. but when have put the matter
up 10 the council and they do not act
the fault is not with me and Fountain
should have moved TO sue for dam
age. He tells you I turned down a
franchise for a new water and light
company. This | did not do. but | did
ask the council 10 safeguard the city's
interest in granting that franchise.
The only amendments were my sug-
gestions was a penalty OF 500 a day |
for failure 10 furnish light or water |
for private or public use. that the city |
should get free water and light for
all public buildings and water troughs.
! asked for some specific agreement
10 give protection TO more Of the town |
than is now covered. but failed. After
e. A. Cleaver secured his franchise.
Alderman Fountain advocated the
city giving 20 c. A. Cleaver the $780, |
600 voted by the tax payers. together
with a block OF ground In exchange
for stock in the new water and light
company. thus assisting a private com |
psny 10 launch a new plant.
The city Of Bryan 20 years ago
gave TO private parties $4,000 OF their
bonds and today We owe $4,000 OF
these bonds and have very poor SER
vice from the company. promised
the council that so long as l am may
OF would fight the giving OF the pub
lie money for private enterprise.
consider this possibility the creates,
danger that confronts Bryan today.
Just think of II. take stock for your
bonds and then have TO pay a rolnd
sum for water and lights that yor-fur.
nish the principal sum to get
c. A. Cleaver Is a promoter. Give
to him your $4,000 in bonds and he
can finance a 100000 plant. But lis
ten, What he can do. you can do.
and should do. Whether | am elected
or not. | stand for the city spending