The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-11-30
Exum Makes Statement

 ton ordinance was adopted without dissenting voice.
 Exum Makes Statement Previously MT. Exum had been as- sured by Capt Romaine Boyd, city at- torney. that the revocation was for the purposes. do not know anything court case instituted by the city. only on that ground did MT. Exum agree to take the hasty action. He explained his vote as follows:
 q have been assured by the city at torney and by the two associate mem bers of the commission, both of whom are attorneys, that the ordinance re- volxing the water contracts is for legal purposes l do not know anything about the merits of the ordinance or whether the allegations are true ana only vote for the annullment of the contracts because of the assurance that 1t is a legal precaution."
 The ordinance charges among other things that the company has repeatedly allowed it's meters to be falsely read and has issued fraudulent bills for wa ter. The city charges nine additional counts against the company. The revo- cation of the contract with the city can only be made for cause and the city claims that the cau1es are palpably plain and manifest.
 The revocation of the contracts with the company by the city. now turns the federal court case into one of evidence rather than argument and it will doubt less be months before final decision has been reached.
 Text of Ordinance
 The ordinance as adopted unani- mously follows:
 seWhereas, The Birmingham Water works company claims to have existing, valid, binding contracts for supplying water to private or individual consumers city of Birmingham and fixing rates for such water service, made with the city of Birmingham and the former municip- alities annexed to or absorbed by said city of Birmingham, Sto-wit: Avondale. woodlawn. Ensley. West End, East Lake Wylam, Elyton, Graymont, North Haven and Pratt City, and
 "Whereas, The city Of Birmingham ex- pressly denies that the Birmingham Waterworks company has or has ever had any such contracts by which rates are or were legally fixed for private or in dividuai consumers for such water sup ply, and
 Whereas, if the Birmingham Water works comapny has ever had any such contracts it has nevertheless. during the past two years, both prior and subse- auent to July 5. 1912, severally and sepa- rately violated and preached It's said con tracts as follows, viz:
 Il. By failing to furnish water to its water consumers of the kind quality and l wholesomeness stipulated in it's contract.
 70 By failing to furnish water to its consumers and the city at the pressure stipulated in it's contract a By habitually refusing to lay or l furnish service pipes from it's mains to l the property line of the lots or property 1 of applicants for water service notwith- standing such lots or property abutted 1 on the highway along which the water 1 company's mains were laid and that it ! was the duty of the water company to proyide such portion of such service pipe | or line without expense to the applicant | for water service
 A. By repeatedly and wiifully compell- | ing citizens who were applicants for its water service and ready to comply with 1 the lawful regulations of the water com pany. to either lay or provide for said 1 > > GContinued on Page Scvesl