Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-09-12
METERS AND WATER RATES

To the Editor Of the Evening Ledger:
Sir-I was much interested in an edito-
rial in the EVENING LEDGER dealing with
the water meter question under the caption
"Bamboozling the Public" have READ
with interest quite a number of articles on
the same subject at various times but in
none have ever seen that the tenants side
was given a fair hearing.
After dealing at length with the fairness
Of the water meter system. toward the end
of the article you say. 1T is an imposition.
positively mean imposition. on the masses
Of the people to wheedle them into believing
that the water meter system would be IN
furious to their interests. That fallacy mas
been given wide circulation. We do not
know why, although there is about II the
smell of politics"
1 take exception to that portion of your
article Every article that l ever read, in
cluding yours, deals only with the tnstalla-
ton of the meters, but takes no account or
the water taxes already being paid by the
renter of a home. meter installed simply
means that much water rent in addition
and no accounting for the taxes being paid
in the rent. That, in my estimation, is the
rotten part that. TO me, smells of politics"
don't think TO point out this injustice to
the masses is a mean imposition"
When a man has built a house to rent he
takes account of the entire cost. He then
considers the depreciation in value, the In
surance, the taxes. including water tax or
rent He then calculates what he considers
a fair rate of interest on his investment and
fixes the rate of rent according to his cal
culation. Now this is only fair and as II
should be- II he, were TO be charged for
the gas consumed by the tenant he would
have to- include this in the rental also.
Now, then. Suppose the city installs the
water meters. Who pays for the water con-
sumed, according TO the reading of the
meter? Why the tenant, of course.
Then what becomes OF the millions Of dol
lars the tenants have already paid via the
| rent while consuming that water and for
| which neither they nor the city gets any
| value? DO you suppose that the owner will
| of his own accord put his hand in his
pocket and return to the tenant the amount
he collected In the rent 10 pay for the
water tax? Oh. Yes he will. lake Kelly
will He'll simply sit tight and grin, the
| while murmurlng gently 10 himself, What
| fools ye mortals be-" Sure, the owner is in
| favor Of water meters; they all are it's
| peaches and cream 10 them. and yet which
| Of the two can best afford the additional
/ tax, the owner or the tenant1
Please understand that am not opposed
/ 10 water meters no indeed. / quite agree
| with you that II is the only fair way. II a
| man uses ten gallons of water let him pay
/ for H. IL another uses 1000 gallons let him
| pay for IT, But why should the poor. espe-
cially the worthy poor, who are compelled
| 10 dwell In congested districts commonly
called "guts," and who through their pow
erty in many instances haven't even a bath
tub, be compelled 20 pay for the water that
the more fortunately fixed wastefully
sprinkies on his lawn all night or throws
into the street with hose and then in addi-
tion 10 that be taxed with a meter?
Yes, by all means install good water
meters. But the city has ready at hand the
information as TO exactly what each prop.
erty IN the city is being taxed for water
Let the city install the meters and compe
each owner 10 reduce the rental by tn,
exact amount that Is being collected In tn.
rent TO defray water taxes. II this Is don,
/ am sure there will be no kicks from any
except, perhaps. from the fellow who wastes
ten times his share OF water. Well, let hin
kick He'll soon waste less water. But 4
the city is TO install water meters and max
no provision TO protect the tenant agains
| paying double for his water once to tn
landlord and once 10 the city. ye gods, tn
stencil of such an act win rise to the yer,
heavens themselves. II will stink wors
than any rotten politics have yet heard OF
And you call Il mean imposition" ol
the masses 10 call their attention 70 sucl
condition. oh q A.
H. v. FENGLER
4 Philadelphia, September 7.