The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-01-20

One View, but the Committees Think IL
Not Sustained by the Official Figures for
Five Years Past; On the Contrary. Messrs.
Todd and Glasgow Claim that Our Gas
has Cost Us S1.35 at the Burner The
Granger Water-Gas Plan Adopted; City TO
Pay go Cents Per Thousand for IL ut the
Holder. vs.
A Joint meeting OF the City Council
Committees on Finance and Gas was
held last night in the Chancery Court
room-F. II. Glasgow, Esq, in the chair
to consider the matter OF enlarging our
city gas-works. The consumption OF gas
has outgrown the capacity Of the works.
II il barely possible now TO manufacture
enough to supply the city. Next winter
they will undoubtedly prove inadequate.
1t is therefore agreed on all sides that they
must be enlarged. The question is how
shall that be done.
THE VISIT NORTH.
A subcommittee representing the Com
mittees on Finance and Light last summer
visited Washington, Baltimore, Philadel-
phia, and New York, and accumulated Il
vast amount OF information concerning the
manufacture OF gas. They particularly in
quired into the worth Of the new process
the Lowe or water gas. They found that
gas in use in Washington. Baltimore, and
New York; in the last-named Il great
part Of the business section is lighted satiS-
factory by water gas. The two gases-wa-
! ter and coal-cln be mixed in the holder.
| In some towns and cities both processes
are in daily use. Philadelphia is one OF
the few cities that makes its own gas, and
there the coal process is still in use. The
majority of that subcommittee. and Mr..
Glasgow and Colonel Cutshaw with them,
returned here convinced--trSt, that Rich
mOnd should retain ownership of the
works and control OF the distribution OF
her gas, but that it might be manufactured
and put in the holder by contract and,
second, that the merits OF the water gas
were fully established. and that it is as
good if not better gas than that made from
coal.
MEETING LAST NIGHT.
At the joint meeting held last night all
| these matters were considered. Supern-
tendent Knowles and Foreman Adams
were present and answered Il number OF
questions, and Mr.. Anderson, OF Cincin-
natl, manufacturer Of gas-works. sub
coal-works so that the coal would yield
more and the labor be much less than at
present, and the light be better. The pre-
else cost he did not give, but it was under
stood that it would be somewhere about
S25,O00. At the proper time, he said, he
would give the exact figures. The works
can be put up in from four to six months.
If these plans are adopted Foreman Adams
said the gas could be put into the holder at
49t cents per thousand feet. Members Of
the committee estimated that the cost OF
distribution would be - cents. Nh
Adams said 90. II so, the total cost OF
coal-gas so manufactured would be 6it or
G94 cents per thousand.
The city nows sells its gas at g per thou
sand feet.
WATER-GAS OFFER.
Mr.. Granger, representing Il water-gas
company, also addressed the committee.
He had previously submitted written
proposition heretofore published) Offering
to give bond and security to furnish gas in
the holder at sixty cents per thousand; not
to disturb the present "plant" works,
&c.l; to erect the new works at their own
cost: to sell the new works to the city the
first year at $685. 900, and at figures on a de-
clining scale eUch year afterwards, or at the
end OF eleven years to deliver said works
to the city free of charge.
OBJECTIONS.
1t was urged against Mr.. Anderson's
plans that there was no specific guarantee
that they would produce the results
claimed.
1t was urged against Mr.. Grangcr's that
il would not be wise for the city to relin-
quish control OF its works even in part.
ALL SORTS OF VIEWS.
There was good deal Of discussion.
Mr.. Todd and Mr.. Glasgow favored the
Granger proposition. Mr.. Cohen sug-
gested that proposals be advertised for and
tnat the best offer be taken. bIr. Higgins
was decidedly in favor Of the Anderson
plans. 1t seemed that Mr.. Knowles and
Mr.. Adams were, too. Mr.. Glasgow in
sisted that, in the light Of past experience,
allowing all that Mr.. Anderson claimed,
his plans could not produce gas at 494
cents, but that it would be 81 cents. Mr..
Higgins showed a statement from Mr..
Adams that the cost under the present old
fashioned process was for last month only
GG3 cents per thousand delivered in the
holder. Add 30 cents for diStribution.l
Mr.. Frischkorn, who was one Of the COM
mittee who went North, doubted the
policy OF adopting the Granger pro-
posal but was willing to await
further information. Mr.. Higgins said
that Mr.. Adams would give bond and
security that with the Anderson works
they would put gas in the holder at less
than 50 cents. Mr.. Todd said that II even
that were so the city would still have TO
erect the new works at cost OF 5000.
Mr.. Frischkorn proposed delay, to give the
Committee on Light time TO prove the
figures of Mr.. Adams; but he said that
syndicate of Richmond men could be
formed to put the gas into the holder at Mr..
Adams's figures. Mr.. Cohen thought that
Mr.. Higgins had not refuted the figures OF
Mr.. Glasgow and Mr. Todd as to the eX-
perience OF the last five years-that is, that
the gas had cost the city Sl.3j cents at tie
burner, and that their figures showed they
would reduce that 33 cents.
GRANGER OFFER ADOPTED.
After a long discussion a motion to re-
commend to the City Council the apprO-
priation Of $4,000, or so much thereof as
may be necessary, to build new works ac-
cording to Mr.. AndersOn's plans was re-
jected-ayes, 6; noes, I.
On the adoption Of the Granger offer the
vote was Us follows:
AYRs-AIessrs. Glasgow. Todd, Cohen, Har-
grove, Pizzini, Crcnshaw. Barksdale-7.
NoEs.-Messrs. Gum, frischkorn, Higgins, Tay-
lor, Phillips, BOwie-6.
A FACT.
The discussions all showed that the city
OF Richmond is now gouging consumers
most feariully. Gas only costs the city,
they say, with the present old-iashioned
process, SGA cents per thousand [G63x20l,
and the city sells it TO consumers at S2.
The PrOpOsitiOp.