Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-09-13
GAS VERSUS ELECTRICITY.
Arguments I'm Case of Gas Co. Against
the Electric Heat and Power Co.

A00x00(
the Electric Heat and Power Co.
The third day of argument on the bills of the
Washington gas light company and Of Gam
mack and others against the District Commits
sioners and the Electric heat and power COM
pany opened up this morning in the room Of
the Court In General Term before Chief
Justice Bingham. The audience. composed
principally Of persons interested in
the endeavor Of the complainants 10 secure an
injunction preventing the extension Of the
electric lighting Of the city. was not quite Is
large as 1t was yesterday, for there had been 30
much quoting from authorities that the pro-
ceeding were TO all save the lawyers fiat
stale and Improbable"
When the court adjourned yesterday after
noon Mr.. G. C. Cole had the floor and he had
II again this morning. His argument was .
lengthy one, Astounding in references TO cases
which IN some respects paralleled that being
The more forcible points made by Messrs.
Harry Z. Davis and n. Dumont were clnched
by. additional testimony and new lines of de-
Tense were thrown out and novel aggressiveness
was developed Especial stress was laid upon the
opinion rendered by Justice Montgomery in
the case Of the Barber asphalt company
against the Crawford paving company. The
entire opinion was read and its most salient
points commented upon at length.
MR.. COLE ON MIR. WEBB.
Mr.. Cole referred to the statement made YES
terday by Mr.. worthington that the contract
between the District Commissioners and the
heat and power company was not valid because
1t had been made without previous public
advertisement; this Mr.. Cole characterized as
an odd argument coming as it did from coun-
Sci on the other side, one OF whom had been q
District Commissioner for three or four
years and yet in all that time there
had never been any advertisement for
proposals from individuals or corporations
to light the city. That Commissioners Gus
tom had been TO give the contract to the WASH
ington gas light company without any adver-
tisement whatever.
Mr.. Cole devoted good deal Of time and
attention TO the allegations made in the bill
filed by Cammack and others. The complain
ants, ne urged, did not even allege that
the excavations which were to be made
in the street would be in front of
their property, and even il they had done 20
they could not ask for an injunction, because
the tearing up of street was but q temporary
inconvenience and not nuisance.
At 1880 Mr.. Cole concluded his argument
and the court declared recess for half an hour
THE QUESTION OF AUTHORITY.
When the court reassembled Mr.. Harry E.
appropriation act of 1882 which authorized the
Commissioners to substitute "'other illuminat-
ing material for gas in case no contract could
be made by the gas company for S22 per lamp
per annum or less.
MR.. woRrHINaToN's CLOSING ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Worthington then commenced his closing
argument in behalf of Cammack and others.
He expressly cut his case loose from that of the
gas company, and went on to review the aver
ments of the bill of his clients.
DE assalled the ''disingenusousness OF the
commissioners IN their answer, in which, with
the tax books almost before them, they state
that they did not know whether or not his
clients were tax payers and spoke of the laxity
OF the provisions of the contract under which
the streets would be torn up to receive the
conduits and wires of the electric company.
TRIANGULAR DISPUTE.
On the question of the power of the Commits
sioners and Congress there was little triangu-
lar dispute, Messrs. Davis and Cole holding
that Congress could, IL it was so inclined
cut the streets up into building lots
and sell them, and Mr.. Worthing-
ton declared that Congress could do
no such thing. The site of the congressional
library was referred to by Mr.. Davis. and as
MIR. Worthington did not care to break away
from the line OF his argument the matter was
dropped
dozen Interruptions by Mr.. Cole brought
from Mr.; Worthington an appeal for a little
time in which to tell the court what he Worth
ington) thought Of Mr.. Coles four hour speech
and Mr.. Cole good-humoredly subsidized for q
time.
After stating that the street railroads were
now necessary and we're common in all the
principal cities Of the world, Mr.. worthing-
ton asked counsel on the other side
if they thought the Commissioners had
power, to grant any one permit
TO lay street railroad tracks on
the streets of this city. Both Mr.. Davis and
Mr.: Cole said no, and then Mr.. worthington
claimed that the provision of means of trans
portation was as much the duty Of government
as the provision of artificial illumination.
This was disputed, SO Mr.. worthington let it
drop and went on to read authorities
THEN CAME MORE INTERRUPTIONS
from Mr.. Davis, and Mr.. Worthington with
some acerbity requested the court to cause the
interruptions to cease. His honor was about
to say something on that line when Mr.. Dauis
arose and protested that 1t was unfair for Mr..
Worthington to introduce new citations into q
closing speech and to quote from acts Of Con-
gress long since superseded
The chief justice said he hoped there would
be no more interruptions except where there
seemed to be an absolute necessity.
In less than five minutes afterward Mr.. Cole
had another interruption in and Mr.. Worthing-
ton sat down. Mr.. Cole at once took the 6oor
and apologized for what he had done. but he
insisted that Mr.. Worthington was acting nm
fairly in bringing in new matter-statutes
OF which no previous mention had been made.
No matter, however, what Mr.. Worthineton
said during the remainder Of his argument be
(Cole) would not open his mouth.
MR. woRTHNGToN DENIED
that he was acting unfairly and expressed a
willingness to assent to another opportunity for
argument being given opposing counsel with
the understanding, of course, that the case
should be closed by the complainants.
Mr.. Worthington said he could not bring
himself to imagine that the court would decide
that citizens had no right to interfere when
taxes which they had paid were being illegally
squandered by the local authorities.
AT THREE O'CLOCK
Mr.. Worthington was still speaking, and the
probabilities we're that Mr.. Webb's closing argu-
ment for the gas company will have to be made
tomorrow morning
The chief justice had expressed q desire to
have the argument finished by noon TODAY. but
1t looks now as though it will be near noon To-
morrow before the oratory ceases
Junk Dealer Fined,
1t 10 just as much violation of the Law for a
junk dealer to purchase old metal from minor