The Lancaster news. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1905-current, 1916-11-10


tract by the City Of Lancaster to fur
nish water to the Lancaster Cotton
Mills. The mayor insinuates tha.
my motive was not so much to serve
the public interest, but was rather
animated by hostility to certain
members of the city council and to
Col. Leroy Springs. as president of
the Lancaster Cotton Mills" In
fact he says such purpose is "mani-
lest. l disclaim any such purpose.
My sole object was to suggest to the
city council that they give the public
through the newspapers the pro
posed plan. with facts, figures and
estimates, and to offer the sugges
ton that the council should be sure
lof two matters, viz:
First. Whether the city was get
ting a reasonable profit for its wa
ter.
Second. Whether such contem-
plated contract would endanger the
supply OF water.
TO keep the record straight. I will
give my former communication in its
entirety, so that the public can
draw its own differences. Here il is;
MIR. Editor: / understand that
the city council is considering the
matter of supplying the Lancaster
Cotton Mills with water. If such be
the case the council should be abso-
lutely certain of two facts. viz:
First. That the contract gives
the city a reasonable profit.
Second, That the present source
OF water supply, considering the fu,
ture growth of the city, is not there.
by endangered.
Along with other taxpayers. I am
interested in this matter and think
that the council should be absolutely
sure of their ground before enterine
into a contract which would obligate
the city to furnish, outside of the
city limits, many millions of gallons
OF water. each year, during the life
Of the contract.
'Of course there is no objection to
such contract provided the citv
gets a reasonable profit and the fu-
ture water supply be not jeopardized
Would it not be well for the city
council to give the public the benefit
OF such facts, figures and estimates
as they have obtained on the SUBJ
ject?"
We challenge any one to find in
this article, one word, or sentence.
which Is not in keeping with the pro-
prieties and with my rights as a citi-
zen and taxpayer. The mayor, in.
stead of combining himself to the two
issues raised in my article, indulges
in gratuitous and unwarranted per-
sonalties. thereby initiating plain
tif's attorney, who realizing that his
client had no case, proceeded to
abuse defendants attorney. At any
rate, the public through my instru-
mentality has been put into posses.
sion Of just the kind of information
1t ought to have. The data given %,
the mayor, whilst interesting, does
not satisfy me that the city, under
the proposed contract will get a
reasonable profit for it's water, at :.
cents per 1000 gallons, or that the
supply will not be jeopardized al,
some future time
AS to the first point, I understand
that our own citizens who use water
have to pay rs cents for the first
1000 gallons. or less used, and nom
residents one dollar for a like
amount. Why should these be dis
criminated against in favor OF con-
sumers' of water in the mill district :?
The city OF Chester will furnish wa
ter to the Wylie Mills at the. domestic
rate. making no discrimination
against Its citizens, as hereinafter
shown. then why should Lancaster
do otherwise? II the water
lis to be furnished, why should
lit not be furnished directly,
I II the water Is to be furnished, why
should II not be furnished directly.
by the city, to the consumer, at
something like the rate. now in force
as to nonresident consumers, which
lis $1.00 for every 1000 gallons,
provided of course that the supply
lis not endangered. The mayor says
the proposed contract will be of