The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-01-17

the consumer should have the right to basis.
 2. This proposition is made in good | faith in the hope of achieving friendly
 relations between the water company
 and the people of Birmingham. If it
 should be accepted we would expect
 the acceptance to carry with it a frank and final settlement, so far as related
 to the company's franchise, of all past | grievances, and an order of dismissal
 or other appropriate order in the Weatherly and Hankins cases.
 Statement of the Water Company With Reference to the Foregoing Proposition
 Should the foregoing proposition be ac- cepted the immediate effect would be to reduce the revenue of the water com pany more than one hundred thousand
 dollars ($100,00O a year. The gross reve-
 nues of the water company for the year
 ending October 1, 1913, were s551 951 45. Out
 of this the water company had to pay interest on indebtedness of approxi-
 mately four and a half million dollars. It also had to pay $49,S57.7 .79 state, county and city taxes. It also had to pay its operating expenses and make suitable
 provision for replacement and other necessary charges. We cannot estimate with accuracy what the water companys S revenues will be for the present year. It
 is certain that if the proposition which we herewith make should be accepted, the
 net earnings of the water company ap-
 plicable to dividends, after the payment
 of interest on it's bonded debt operat-
 ing expenses, taxes and other necessary
 charges, would be exceedingly h all.
 For several years past the water com
 pany has spent, and for many years in the future will have to spend, each year in extensions and improvements of it's
 system to take care of the growth the town. many times it's net revenue. In submitting the proposition which we are now making the tremendous cut which the water company offers to make in it's revenues affords the best evidence of our sincere desire to satisfy the thoughtful people of Birmingham. We trust, there fore. that we will not appear dictatorial, stiff-necked or stubborn when we say that the foregoing proposition is the best prop osition which we can make in justice to our stockholders. The rates which we offer are as low as we can offer and secure even modest return on the in- vestment We believe that If, as the re- suit of litigation. the city could secure the right to fix rates by legislation, rates lower than those which we offer would be held confscatory. If the city were operating the water plant, we do not believe that the water plant could be conducted as a self-sustainng proposi- ton by the city on the basis of lower rates
 There is another thought which we wish to impress upon you. The proposi- tion which We submit is made because we want to satisfy the people with whom we do business in this city This is neith- CT the time nor the place to discuss the pending against the water com pany. We would simply say that the proposition which we make is not made in fear of the outcome of that litiga- ton. However successful the city might be in that litigation, we would never which we now submit for the simple req a better proposition.
 "On the other hand, should the Wa ter company be compelled to defend the courts at tremendous ex- pense to itself law suits attacking it's corporate life, and every franchise l which 1t has. and should 1t be com | pelled to invest large sums of money in | additional plant and equipment to take | care of the Wasteful and extravagant l use of water, the water company would l not be able or willing, in the event it | should finally succeed in all law suits | directed against it, to renew the prop l cannot. therefore. allow this propos- ton 10 remain open indefinitely. we arc | entirely willing, in view of the im l portance of the matter, to give the | up to and including the | first day of February to reply to the | and we are further will ing to agree that should the proposi- !