The Washington critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1885-1888, 1886-04-08
WASHINGTON, APRIL 8, 1886.
NO MORE GAS MoNopoLY.

No mOhE GAS MONOEobh'
The opinion recently transmitted to
Congress by the District Commission
ers, to the effect that the organization
of competing gas companies in the
District of Columbia should be dis
souraged and that no further legislation
in this direction is ncedful or expedient,
is to be taken for what 1t means and
accepted as decisive. THE CRITIC has
no quarrel with this opinion, nor with
the Commissioners or ex-Commission
ers who uttered IT, On the contrary,
we are disposed to believe that under
all the circumstances this view of the
question Is we'll taken. We assume
that II Is.
Admitting, however, that 1t is better
to remain at the mercy of the one ex-
listing monopoly than to confer any
more charters of the same sort, with the
chances of their all being soonor or
later absorbed in the old corporation,
were 1t not still better both for the
Government and people to get rid of
this thing of gas monopoly altogether? T?
The history of many such enterprises
shows them to be of q purely specu-
lativc character; hence the people are
naturally shy of all schemes that are
organized under the specious cry of
competition, lest at the first convenient
opportunity they barter their fran
chises for price and sink their loud
promises of reform in some consoli-
dated pool. There is demand for
cheaper gas, nevertheless; and 1t is
very certain that cheap gas will never
be had as long as the exclusive privi-
p lege Of its manufacture and sale Is
vested in single corporation.
What then? The way out Of the
difficulty is plain.
Has II ever occurred to the citizens
of Washington that they get cheaper
and better water supply under the
present system, than If they depended
on private concern for it2 Is there a
citizen of the District who would take
the control of the water-works out of
the hands of the General Government
and turn the business over to an asso-
citation of Individual capitalists
But why may not the General Gov
ernment furnish the District with light
as well as water2
Why the necessity, or where the jus.
tice, of paying exorbitant prices to the
Gas Company and only fair and reason.
able rents to the water boards, when by
like assumption of authority in the
one case as in the other, gas as well as
water may be furnished at cost? Here
there is solution of the whole prob.
lem and we thank the Commissioners
for having opened up the way to the
suggestion.
Let the General Government in the
exercise of its supreme jurisdiction
and by due process of condemnation
precisely the process it will adopt il
taking the lots east of the Capitol, OF
which to build its Congressional Ii
brary-proceed TO the acquisition OF
the property of the Gaslight Company
1t can be done by appraisement and ar
bitration, the same as other private
property is acquired for public uses
1t might cost the Government consid.
cradle sum of money, but the enc
would certainly justify the expense as
well as the means.
What the Government itself would
save by such an operation, would more
than cover high rate of interest or
the cost of the investment and leav,
an annual sinking fund besides; while
to the community at large, this trans
fer of control would mean not only
better light, but better management
and better satisfaction; and gas at
price computed upon the bare expens
of manufacture and maintenance, and
not upon the basis of big dividends.
There is nothing wild or visionary il
the proposition. 1t is practicable ant
just. 1t is in the direction of economy
1t simply means the buying out by tn,
Government in its own interest and il
the interest of the people, of power
full monopoly, which quite too long al
ready, has been permitted to exis
and flourish and hold undisputet
domination at the National Capita
and upon public reservation.