Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-08-02
Cost OF CIV Gas.


| was somewhat surprised to know that
my old friend and colleague on the Finance
Committee OF the city in 1854 prepared the
"staiemeut Showing Cost OF Gas In 1887 y
the more 80 because well remember his
able efforts at the time he was on that COM
mittee to prove that our gas cost more than
81 npr Thousand cubic feet-in fact, he was
tie author Of the ordinance which fixed the
cost OF Gas 10 the city at 81 per thousand
cubic feet, aud which remained In force until
n few months ago, when the Council changed
his ordinance and ordered that gas should be
charged al Sl.5O.
In order 70 make Gas cost the city 81 and
over per 900 cubic feet in 1854 MIR. Glas-
cow figured In the interest aud fixed by Or
dinapce that the sum OF 100000 Uhe very
sum charged against the works. should be
entered up against the works and deducted
from IFS profits annually 10 arrive ct the net
results. | might say that Mr.. Glasgow had
q motive at that time for making the cost OF
Gas as high as possible, az be was most able
advocate for leasing out the works TO the
United Oil Company OF Philadelphia;
but | shall not do so, as be claims
10 "haye no other than the public
good at heart, while |, as secretary OF the
Electric.Light Company" he says, am "scek-
inc to fasten on the city at great sum, to be
raised by increased taxation, this tanciiul
scheme.r Il happens that | am not secrc-
tary Of the Electric Light Company, nor haye
| any connection therewltb, except as
stakeholder holding asmall amount o. stock.
might With equal Justice charge Mr. Glasgow
with having q great interest In the extension
OF gas -Iuains enlargement OF the works, &c =,
because his company manufactures nearly all
the mains She city uses, bat l don't pro.
pose 10 discuss MIR. Glasgow, whom
[ have always esteemed as high
ly honorable citizen, aud only desire
to discuss the question as 10 what IS best Tor
the cty's Interest, Gas or electric light on IL
streets, and should not have mentioned the
subject OF "mOtiyes" had be not attributed
a highly interesting one TO me. That Inte-
rest and wear and tear should not be charged
10 the cost OF gas is absurd. II is as much a
mart of the cost OF manufacturing gas as la
Dor and coal, and / have shown that by count
ing II in gas cost SILL 5.5 per LOCO cubic
feet. The city uses &c, 15S, 2S2 cubic feet on
that portion Of Der streets winch are now
lighted by Gas, and the Superintendent Of
tue Gas-Works says IL will take S,&4,0
cubic feet 10 light the remainder OF the
city, making
Total Of 4i,72s.2s2, which at $i.;7 a.
would fC3t-...-.. ..-fo<,On~ %
Electric lights now in operation cost -. -.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. ~J,oVV W
Making total of......................S7 2,6S2 So
which Is some $1,000 to $1,000 more than the
Electric. Light Company proposes TO light
the city for But this is not all. II the gas
the city row consumes Ia her public-street
lights were seld TO private consumers, who
are demanding ii, it would put inio the
City treasury the sum OF. ................s4,e37
Which. added 10 tue electric-light appro-
pTiaton. ~O,'VO
or Ss,237 moro than the lighting Of the
entire city BY electricity would cost. Where,
then, does the increased taxation come In 2
The people OF Clay, Jackson. Marshall,
Monroe, aud Jefferson wards living where
there are neither gas nor electric lights are
watchdog the issue now being joined with
interest, aud they look 10 their representa-
tiyes for an intelligent examination into the
subject aud will not be satisfied with the
false arguments OF the enemies OF progress
nor the "pooh.poohs OF those VINO enjoy
light stI eets. &c. A. PIzzISI, JR.