The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1911-08-04
c. E. Shiveley for Water W. orks Company, Says the
Plan to Give City Percentage of Earnings of the
Corporation for Privilege of Using Streets
Is Poor for Company and Consumers.
PURE WATER RANKS AHEAD OF Low RATES
Council Chamber, the Hearing of Richmond City Wa
ter Works Companys Proposal Last Might Was
Filled with Interested Citizens Who Asked
Number of Per nent Questions.

fund"
According to the attorney the pres
cnt company has perpetual franchise.
He said that this question WAS settled
two years ago. However. he said that
the company was not going to use this
alleged power as club to whip tho
city into giving a twenty-five years
contract to the Richmond Water.
Works company. "All criticism that
the present company IL intending to,
use its franchise as club is pure nom
sense for two reasons: first. 1t would
not be good business judgment. and
second, the courts would not allow .
public service corporation to hold q
city up. The city Is protected by the
law"
A. to Free Water.
Mr. Shiveley believes that ~ tho
city must have water II makes no diff.
ference what company furnishes water
as long as the rates are fair In con-
nection with this subject Mr.. Shiveley
said that he does not favor the city
securing free water az 1t will eventu-
ally be paid for by the consumers.
"Its the old, old story. the waterworks
company is not going to give any va
ter away" he said. ut is the same
with fire hydrant rentals The other
company may propose charging low.
er hydrant rental and 1t naturally
looks better to the city oflicials. But
someone is going to make that up. And
TT will be the small consumer Our
company could give the city free va
ter and charge but few dollars rem
tai per annum for hydrants. but the
cost would be 1Aid on the eoueu1nAf.
Under the proposed contract the
company can take but six per cent ok
the profits, and one-half Of the proAts
over six per cent and to eight Per
cent and the remainder goes to the
city. So 1t is . physical impossibility
for the company to give away any
thing.
Another question! Should Q man
with five-room house pay for the city
water? No, the taxables should pay
for it, In this manner the rich man
and the poor man pay according to the
they use water or not"
Raps Rival Proposal.
Albeit Mr. Shiveley declared that Il
was not outside Of the city's ability to
purchase the water works plant no
said he assumed that the Campdeld
Icompany's proposal was down and
out" The Campheld proposition would
be illegal. he said. because the city
would be contracting debt beyond
the constitutional limitation. II the
city purchases the present plant It will
have to raise the money, he said.
| A suggestion made by G. o. Ballen-
ger to the effect that the board Of pub
lie works should devise q proposal Of
their own and then advertise for bids
to meet the requirements Of tho
boards plan. apparently met with un-
animous approval by all present at
the meeting. Mr.. Ballenger asserted
that the board in outlining the propos-
ais should leave the matter of fire hy-
drant rentals to the bidders and that
this would leave margin enough for
competitive bidding.
Taking up Mr.. Ballenger's statement
Mayor Zimmerman said that this idea
had been thought Of by the board and
that If neither OF the proposals wers
satisfactory the city would outline .
contract.
Watson P. O'Neil. former member
OF the board Of works. brought up the
question about the extension Of water
mains. He said that this problem had
confronted the city for the past TWEEN
|ty-Ave years. He declared that 1t did
not seem right to him for anyone to be
refused water because the company
did not care to extend the mains and
would not unless the city paid for an
extra fire hydrant.
/ Who viii Judge Water.
who is to Judge whether the water
lis pure and wholesome" was the ques.
.tion asked the water works represen.
Itatfve by Timothy Nicholson. He waa
answered that this matter was left Ia
the local health authorities. In case q
new water supply is demanded the
city is to dictate on this question and
the company's only recourse win be
to appeal to the courts. This fact waa
brought out by the questions asked BY
Edward n. Harris
Water in Schools.
) Mr.. Shiveley. In resuming his dis.
tcussion said one thing which should
be remedied was that Of allowing the
fossets in the various school buildings
Ito run during the night. A large guam.
itity of water 10 wasted in this manner
because, he said. the janifors neGlect
! CONTINUED on Page Eight