South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1917-12-27
GARBAGE ROW TIES
COUNCIL IN A KNOT
CONTINUED FROM PAGE oNE.)


works and the Chamber of Com
merce and two experts from Chica-
go were heard at the meeting,
which was featured by mix-ups,
out-of-order motions. tie votes and
questions Of order.
The report from the committee Of
the whole. recommending passage
OF the ordinance, was read and ac-
copied by the council, and then the
ordinance itself, an ordinance rati-
flying the contract between the
board Of public works and Mayor j.
II. Mellett of Anderson, was given
its third reading.
Abe Frank, manager Of the Oliver
hotel. who has been interested in
the proposition, introduced L. \.
Burrows Of Chicago, representing
the United Disposal and Recovery
Co, who spoke at length, dwelling
upon the advantages of a reduction
plant in place of the proposed hos
farm as a means of disposing of
the citys garbage probably, and
intimating that even with the hog
farm method he was in a position
to make a better proposition that
the one made by Mr.. Mellett.
Samuel Greeley, also of Chicago,
was then introduced by Mayor Kel-
Ter, and he took the other side of
the question. The advantages of
the piggery as compared with those
Of a reduction plant were pointed
out by the speaker, who said that
for a city the size of South Bend
a reduction plant would not be
profitable, while a piggery would
bring in fair returns.
The Propositions.
The following figures are taken
from the statements Of +. A. Bur
rows TO the council favoring a re-
duction plant The figures We're
practically substantiated by Samuel
Greeley. sanitary engineer, who
presented the opposite side Of the
problem:
REDUCTION PLANT.
Twenty tone Of garbage per day.
present estimated production.)
so lbs. grease per ton garbage
at 10c 10. (market price, $3.50
tons fertilizer from 20 tons
garbage at SIS per ton (esti-
mated value) .........,...- y
Total revenue ...........S2 1892
Plant expenses, including de-
probation, etc. (estimated). 100
FRONT. per day ......s..... 70. S1o-
MUNICIPAL PIGGERY.
ton OF garbage to feed 100
hogs. gaining at least 1 10.
per day.
1000 hogs, gaining 10. each
per day at zoe ID. $500
| (No expense figures submitted,
since expense would vary with
location. etc. Allowing IS
percent expense, however, this
would amount tO) ........ 800
Profit, per day ..........$10O
PROPOSED CONTRACT.
20 tens garbage at 81 per ton 5 20
(No expense for disposaD
Profit, per day ........S 20
other speakers followed, present
! ing both sides, Mayor Keller speak
/ ing in favor of the ordinance. and
| Atty. Archibald Graham speaking
against it. urging that the measure
/ be deferred for some time in order
! to allow more thorough study.
Criminal to- Burn It, Says Mayor.
| 1T is criminal TO waste the gar
| bage by burning il, as has been done
and is being done at the present, "
| declared Mayor Keller. in the course
/ of his talk. Conservation is the
watchword. and we should do our
best 10 conserve. BY selling the
garbage TO be used as food for hogs
We are conserving and can do so
in a comparatively short time. This
! is an inopportune time 10 build a
| reduction plant"
Councilman Hagerty, wishing ia
! get the matter settled, suggested that
Mr. Burrows make the propositions
which he had said he could make
and let the council pass on them
The legality of this procedure was
questioned, but it was decided that