This is the type of water meter, generally speaking, that was in use during the time described in this story. (Courtesy photo)

“The action of the city dads at the special meeting Monday evening last, as outlined in Wednesday’s Mining Journal, has been the means of creating more or less discussion among the taxpayers of the city. Some favor the establishment of the meter system, while many are strongly opposed to it. With steps being taken by the council for an investigation of the system in cities, where it is in use, the proposition has developed into a live issue.” (Mining Journal, Aug. 3, 1901)

Not everyone was in favor of the installation of water meters.

“Superintendent Walters of the Lake Angeline mine, who served nearly thirteen years as a member of the board of public works, was seen this week by a Mining Journal representative. Mr. Walters has given the water supply question of this city a great deal of thought. At the time C.H. Hall was mayor he and Capt. Walters gave much consideration to suggested plans for improving and increasing the city’s water supply. The captain said:

‘At the outset I want it understood that I am not so strongly opposed to the establishment of a water system, provided it is adopted with a view to giving the city greater financial returns than it is now getting. I have been led to believe by officials of the city that the sole object in establishing a meter system, if one is eventually put in, is to give us more water, and not for the extra money that would be made on the change. If this is true, I cannot understand what good the meters would do. If people are not taxed more than they are now paying, they will certainly use just as much water as they ever did. This being true, we will not be any better off with the meters than we now are without them.

I favor tapping Carp river a short distance beyond the Winthrop junction. With a pumping station there all difficulty will be remedied and there will never again be a shortage of water. As to the cost of this auxiliary station, I believe the whole thing can be put in at about $45,000.'” (Mining Journal, Aug. 3, 1901)

Richard Barney, one of the oldest plumbers in the upper peninsula, was seen, as he is also strongly opposed to the meter system. He has had over twenty-five years experience in his line of work and when asked for his opinion of the meter proposition he expressed it freely, saying:

‘I am against the establishment of the meter system. I have been in cities, Minneapolis, for instance, where meters were put in. At first they worked wonders, but after three or four years the authorities had all kinds of trouble. The meters froze in many places; at some homes, the children broke the glass, also the dials, and I knew of cases where the water users disconnected the meters in their basements during the time intervening between the visits of the inspectors. Thousands of dollars were expended for the meters and now there are none in use in Minneapolis.

The establishment of the meter system would mean more work for me, but I don’t care anything about that. I know that if the meters are put in it will cost a great deal more than anyone here figures on to maintain them. They will freeze and break and cause all kinds of trouble. There are less than one third of the business places and residences of this city with basements, where meters could be placed. This will necessitate placing them in a well-sealed box down some feet in the ground, out in the yard or in the street. If this is not done the kitchen is the only other place to put them. I am afraid there will be all kinds of opposition to having them go into some people’s kitchens. I favor extending the mains to the river, or some other place where we can get all the water we need for all purposes.'” (Mining Journal, Aug. 3, 1901)

The special committee appointed by the common council was busy touring cities in Wisconsin to inspect different water systems and bring some recommendations back to Ishpeming.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This story line will be continued in two weeks.