3

other necessary places. This feature of the old contract I am informed
was not carried out by the Company. But the proposition now made does
not promise to put in or use the Company's own standpipes.

There are other objectionable features to the details of the
proposed contract, which I will not mention.

Third. In the committee's report of April 2nd, it sets out
its estimate of the cost of the city securing and operating its own
sprinkling outfit as follows:-

I5 wagons at $300.00 ---------------------------- $4500.00
I5 teams and horses at $350.00 each ....... 5250.00
stables .................................................. 12250.00
I5 drivers at $50.00 .................................. $750.00
feed and repairs ..................................... 300.00
hostler ................................................... 35.00
inspector ................................................ 60.00

I am informed that the committee figures on an outfit from
one-third to one-half larger than the outfit operated by the Sprinkling
Company. It is my opinion that an outfit two-thirds of the size
estimated can do more sprinkling than ever has been done by the
Company. The amount the city has paid out within the last two years
would bu y the wagons, teams and hdorses for even the large outfit
figured out by the committee. The amount paid by abutting property
owners woudl certainly more than pay the running expenses. It is my
opinion that the city should own its own outfit and do the sprinkling
and collect the charges. The committee suggests that at the end of the
year the city would possible be in shape to undertake the work
municipally; it is my opinion that we had better undertake it now.

Respectfully,

W.D. Harris
Mayor.