The Birmingham age-herald., 1914-07-09

1 the city had authority to make. and
 that during the period fixed by the con-
 tract the city could not disregard the
 rates named in the contract and arbi-
 trarily fix such rates as it deemed proper, without the consent of the water company.
 Judge Crow has decided that the
 water company was giving to the people of Birmingham water of most excellent quality, that all complaints as to its service had been rectified and that the water companys conduct had not been
 such as to justify the forfeiture of it's franchise but that a matter of law
 the water company could not charge for
 water furnished dwellings, in old Bir- mingham upon meter basis.
 Notwithstanding these decisions, the Birmingham Water company desires now to say to the people of Birmingham that 1t believes 1t to be to the interest of the
 people of Birmingham that all water should be furnished upon a meter basis; that 1t knows from experience that more than hundred thousand dollars a year can be saved to the people of Birmng- ham by contract such as that embraced
 in ordinance T-C. and that it is willing to make a fair and reasonable arrange i ment for the sale of water to the people of Birmingham upon a meter basis when ever the city administration is willing | to consider such contract.
 Replying to MT. Weatherlys advice l that consumers of water should not pay ! the bills rendered them, the Birmingham Water company desires to say, these bills will be made out in accordance with the decision just handed down by the circuit 1 court of Jefferson county, and in accord | ance with the decisions of the United | States district court, and of the United l States circuit courts of appeals. The 1 Birmingham Water company is rendering | its bills in accordance with its written | contracts with the city of Birmingham,
 and in accordance with the decisions of
 the courts. Mr. Weatherly says we could | charge less. Will he or any other re- putable lawyer tell the people of Bir- 1 mingham that the charges which we are | making are not in accordance with our i contracts that they are not in accord | ance with the decisions of the courts
 or that they are not lawful and collecti- l ble?
 "To each consumer of water in the 1 city of Birmingham we would say we are l endeavoring to furnish you water of the | greatest possible purity. We are en-
 deavoring to give you the best possible | service. We are charging you in accord | ance with the decisions of the state and | federal courts. If the quality of our | water Is satisfactory, if our bills are | made out in accordance with our writer | contracts and in accordance with the de- | cisions of the courts should you or not I as a matter of common honesty and com.
 mon fairness, pay those bills? Is there l any less reason why you should pay youl water bills than your grocery bills? Il | the water company has charged you il | accordance with it's contract, are you | justified in refusing to pay your bill be | cause the water company could voluntar l fly have made it less? If the water com | pany has charged you in accordance witf | the contracts made by the city authortie: and sustained by the courts, can 1t. | charges be said to be wicked, arbitrar, | or tyranical? Do the same principles oi | good morals and common honesty apply l to cities which apply to individuals? Ii l the city has made valid contracts witt | the water company, is it honorable or fail l or decent that it should refuse to liv' up to them? Is 1t honest or fair ol
 decent for an official of the city to ad wise the people of Birmingham to refuse | to live up to the contracts made for then 1 by the city government? It may be good | politics for a member of the city govern l ment to advise 30,000 people in Birming | ham to refuse to pay their bills. Woulc | 1t be honest. would it be decent, would
 it be square for the 5000 consumers oi
 water to follow this advice? The Bir l mingham Water company has not sough 1 to put MT. Weatherly or the city ad | ministration in hole. The plain trutf l is that MT. Weatherly has assailed tho l water companys contracts and has beer 1 defeated. He has assaled it's franchise | and been again defeated.
 | MT Weatherly now announces tha
 nothing will satisfy him but the annul' l ment of the franchise of the Birmingham | Waterworks company. He Is unwillns l to consider any fair and amicabe agree | me nt fixing rates to De charged by tho
 water company during the balance of its | contract. He advises the people of Bir. mingham and the city administration tc
 pursue policy of virtual repudiation | The Birmingham Waterworks company | believes MT. Weatherly's language to be | incorporate, his position to be unwise | his advice to be unsound. Since nothing l will satisfy Mir Weatherly except the | destruction of the franchise of the bIr- l ningham Wa ,crworks ompany, the water
 company will endeavor, in an honorable | and dignhed manner, to defend it's con | tract rights in the courts of this state
 meanwhile we would say to our GUS
 toners that the water which will be fur