Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000279 77

Information

Digital ID
upr000279-077
    Details
    Rights
    This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.
    Digital Provenance
    Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room
    Publisher
    University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

    The cross examination by the City Attorney indicated that he was attempting to drive home two principal points: 1. That the separation of water production from water distribution results in inefficient^"and costly operation. 2. That the Railroad makes excessive bills upon the Water C ompany for water furnished. Mr. Wehe*s testimony was based upon his original re­port and a supplemental report which has been recently prepared by him containing the aetual results of operation for the year 1950 and an estimate of the results of operation for the year 1951. I am enclosing three copies of the Supplemental Re­port ,2. <Gppies of the Supplemental Report are -astso being sent to I h<=> H ^ Messrs. Hulsizer^ Sutton and Bockes. We expect to complete our showing at the next hearing and hope that it will be possible to have the protestants con­clude their showing at the same hearing. Wm. Reinhardt Ends