The Sewerage Stalemate
A skeptical city council squares off against contractors over a stalled sewer project.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The sewerage question still hangs fire. The council met with Mr. Schmidt during two evenings this week, but could come to no agreement, and adjourned to meet again tonight. Mr. Schmidt has submitted a couple of propositions, but several of the members seem to think that there is a colored gentleman in the woodpile somewhere and are disposed to hold out. That the city has been played with by N. W. Harris & Co. there is little doubt, and some even assert that there is a strong probability that their successors, Seymour, Barto & Co., and Contractor Schmidt are in the deal to extract more money from the city. Councilman Reed, Bartholet and Miller favor the acceptance of Mr. Schmidt’s proposition, and Cox, Needham and Carpenter are opposed. By this proposition the city treasurer would be knocked out of his percentage of $1,063 for handling the bonds, but this amount, instead of being retained in the treasury, would go to the contractor. Councilman Reed figures that the city would gain $11.90 by accepting Mr. Schmidt’s bid, while Councilman Carpenter thinks it would be out of pocket $690.
“Several of the members seem to think that there is a colored gentleman in the woodpile somewhere and are disposed to hold out.”
Infrastructure projects have long been breeding grounds for municipal suspicion. This debate over sewer financing and contractor legitimacy echoes modern concerns about procurement transparency and the struggle to fund public works without private interests ballooning the costs.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.