The Little River news., 1919-11-22
JUDGE SHAVER HOLDS FOR
 CITY AGAINST BOWELS
Effect of Opinion Will Terminate Pri- Nate Water SyStem-Order Held
 Up Until December.


 maintainance and operation of the J R. BoWles private water system, which has been operated in this city since 1911 Judge Shaver, in rendering his opinion withheld any order until Dec ember, when he will hold an adjourned term of court here. This was done to give the city and Mr. Bowes a chance to get together in any way that they may see fit. If this is not done, the court indicated that he would issue an order, providing for the closing of the private water system on terms that shall be laid down by the court, the nature of which was not revealed
 The suit that occupied Wednesday and Thursday morning was suit by the mayor and town council of Ash down to enjoin J. K. Bowles from maintaining and operating water system in opposition to the city water system. Bowles established a private system in 1911 eight years ago He serves today some forty patrons. The city water system was established in 1914 and cost some $4S,000 Until re- gently this system was operated by the commissioners Recently it was taken over by the city council, which the chancellor held, it had right to do and was it's duty to do. On finding the BoWes private system in competition with the city system and drawing rev enue that would otherwise have come to it they began suit to have the Bowl eS system removed.
 Judge Shaver rendered a lengthy opinion setting forth all the facts, a synopsis of which we quote.
 Judge Shaver said. that when peti- ton was circulated to install a city water system Bowles was one of the signers, he was one Of the officers, be- ing on the board of commissioners, who put in and operated a general system while he still owned and oper- ated a special privilege. That BoWles could not have been deceived or have misunderstood but must have known that sooner or later his time would be called. The Bowles system, supplying only part of the town was put in ill 1911 and the general system in 1914. That B0Wles Was a part of the machi- nery that constructed the city system, TO nc bn nonnlo in, With his own private system, that he was in the very front line and went over the top with them while still owning and operating this private sys- tenn. The court said that the proof showed that the BOwles water was more satisfactory than that of the city, right to use the city's streets in strang- ling the city water that had been put in by the city at aj big expense" The court then said that the city officials on taking over the plant as they had the right to do found the BoWles sys- tenn competing with the peoples plant, llllCl ltI III "llll lHc ptOplcS IlSlllS, depriving the city of fair income. He said that the city had a right to control it's streets and allies and that these rights must be guarded by them. Then turning to the resolution passed by the council in June, 1911, permitting Bow les to operate a system, he commented on it. According to the records it was not legally adopted and could have been revoked by the council at any time It had no time limit, nothing to indicate whether it was for time or eternity Said he, "When did BOwles aim to turn loose?" The people had taxed themselves for system ade quate for a city of 15,000. Bowles was one of the men at the throttle. knew all about it, knew his time was on sufferance, knew that to protect him self he could only expect from public official no more than that official had right to givel That if he had spent large sume of money in improving his plant he did it like tenant -on lands not his, knowing that some day his time would be called, otherwise how would the town ever be rid of the com petition?" He said further, that Bowles' plant was claimed to cost s3, 900. offered to sell to the city in 1914 at $1,40O, now claimed it worth $16,- 900, including franchise at Sl0,O00. If a franchise was worth $10,000 to MT. Bowles, the city was damaged $10,000. Bcwles had assessed it at $500 and ac. cording to the assessment rule would be worth $500"
 The court said that the city was right in making move to terminate the operation of this system; that they owed it as a duty to the people. That those who wanted the Bowles water may feel that their rights are being in terferred with, but that most of the people in the town do not have this water and that their rights are being