Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-03-21
wEDNESDAY........ MARCH 81, 1888.
The (ias-Works.

will hardly be two opinions on the sub
ject for, as We have said heretofore, the
experience Of the world demands that
cities shall own their gas-works.
1t is said that Richmond owes so much
money already that she is not able to
make her gas-works what they ought to
be. This would be a good joke If the
subject were not too serious for joking.
In the name of common sense, from
whom would the lessees obtain the
money to pay for improving the gas
works? Why from the people Of Rich
mon, OF course. They are not going to
pay the expense out of their own
pockets. Not they. Their object is to
make money; and necessarily they are
going to make it out OF the very city
that is not able to improve the gas-works
herself And the people here must pay
not only the cost of the work, whether 1t
be one hundred thousand or two or three
hundred thousand dollars, but large
percentage upon that cost-to go to the
lessees as their profits.
Gross inconsistency would be involved
in refusing, as our present City Council
has done, TO allow the City Hall to be
even built by contractors, though a pos
sible expenditure of million of dollars
was involved, and then leasing out the
gas-works 10 contractors because the city
hasn't got $3.50, 900 to expend in supply
ing her people with good gas
But there is too much Of politics in
the gas-works, We are told. If the men
there vote now TO please their employer,
(the city, surely they would be still
more likely to vote to please their new
employers. Let US have no wheels
within wheels.
First one person and then another now
complains that he has to pay for more
gas than he uses But the city's meter
takers have no possible interest in re-
porting g larger consumption than the
facts justify.
The city of Berlin, Prussia, pays Is
per cent. of her expenses out OF her
profits from her gas-works, and the city
OF Leeds, England, furnishes gas for less
than fifty cents per thousand cubic feet.
I'VE said 20 cents instead of % pence in
our issue of Sunday
But the question we are considering is
a politico-economical one, so to speak.
Let us hear what the most distinguished
expert in the United States has to say
on this subject. We allude to Professor
Ely, of Johns Hopkins University, Bal
timore. In letter recently published
in the Sun, Of that city, he says:
II will again only remind the readers
of the Sun that Berlin now defrays Is
per cent. of its expenditure from the
profits on gas-works with gas at less than
one dollar a thousand Since l wrote
my article on gas supply the American
Consul at Leeds has told me that the
people of that city are we'll supplied for
forty four cents thousand
And we are asked to buy gas at Sl.40
per thousand which the same contractors
offer TO furnish to the city lamps at 81.
This 81 is more, of course, than its cost,
which cannot be over 80 cents. Last
year the city made about 100000
cubic feet of gas. A profit of 80 cents
per thousand feet would be $4,000
Can Richmond afford to give away
$4,000? But il Richmond can make
gas as cheaply as it is made in Leeds,
England, or Berlin. Germany, why
should she employ contractors to pocket
the sum Of 100000 year instead of
pocketing it herself? But why give
away even $50, To save an outlay
OF $50, 600 l-or an annual interest of
1880 land this outlay would enable
the city to make more than 10000 900
cubic feet of gas per year,
We quote Professor ELY further-as
follows:
"Who in our legislatures suggests |
proper restrictions on franchises for |
natural monopolies? Is il not time for
our businessmen to move in this mat |
terp New York city has already moved,
and will obtain increased revenues from |
franchises in tho future, there is reason |
10 believe, for under Mayor Hewitt a
halt has been called in the prodigal |
waste Of public resources. and his last |
message to the Council of New York |
abounds in suggestions analogous to |
those in this article. Will Baltimore be /
the last 10 move? Will Baltimore bust |
ness men delay action until opportunity !
to save what public property yet remains
is lost ?"
Seas supply and electric lights are of |
the same nature, save that the city ought /
to make provision as soon as possible TO
acquire works OF its own. Yet we hear
q good deal Of foolish talk about com
petition in electric lighting still Tx
perience will teach us better. But why
wait until We have paid the dear tuition
which experience charges before We act
The correct method in such cases is sim.
pie enough. Existing companies should
be bought out ii they will sell at req
sonable price otherwise they should
be brought to terms by vigorous NUM-
cipal competition. No legnl monopoly
should ever be granted private corpo-
ration, for that is worth great deal of
money. AS legal monopoly can only
be conferred by public authority, the
public ought 10 derive the advantage
fherefrom, and what this advantage is
previous papers have shown.
OF all unaccountable things it is that
BODY Of men supposed TO represent in
peculiar sense the workingmen OF Rich
nond should ever think Of depriving the
ity OF Richmond OF her gas-works.
Who proposes to lease out the water !