The Portland daily press., 1890-08-29
our Street Lighting.
To the Editor of the Press:

| To the Editor OF the Press:
There Is a rumor that it Is contemplated
to make soon a five years contract, instead
| of yearly one as heretofore, for the city
street lighting. This certainly, at present,
would be the height of folly for various CO.
| gent reasons, amongst which are these: The
| present lighting is imperfect and unsatis-
factory, excepting In the near vicinity Of the
arc lamps. The present lighting costs too
much; this years appropriation for it being
$4,000. Five years ago IL was $4,000, and
before that when the city was lighted by
gas, the total expense was only about
$4,000.
Electric methods are likely to come for
ward that will essentially cheaper the cleo
trio service. II so long contract were ad,
visable in this matter it should not be en-
tered into until after notice CT six months
or more, to secure competitive bids and give
ample time to establish the necessary appli-
ances.
Again the present contract should not be
renewed at all unless essentially modified.
The basis Of the contract is 16S arc lights
and 250 incandescents for the round sum of
$4,000. This Is substantially at the rate Of
$3.50 per lamp for arcs. and SIT for incandes-
cents (Which is said to be higher than other
cities pay per lamp. but mark this, the con-
tract has the provision that the city shall
pay for lights furnished In excess Of above
number $40 per year for each arc and S18
for each incandescent. This gives the COM
pany an increment in price Of per cent. oy-
er the body of the contract What merchant
would buy goods in that way? The more you
buy the higher the price. A gradual in
crease in the number of arc lamps has been
going on until now we pay for about 40 adj
ditional to the 16S, while the decrease in in
candescents is only 81 1t is said the SUBJ
stitution of arcs for incandescents is going
on. Five arcs have been added the present
month.
No wonder the so called incandescents are
growing less and less efficient. Where will
this end? The increase in the number of
arc lights means in the end a vast increase Of
our present extravaganza In this matter.
The remedy Is in the hands of our city gov
ernment. 1t Is time to call halt and re-
trench.
Moreover, full investigation should be
made to determine whether large substitu-
tion Of gas for electricity would not be the
cheapest and best, and certainly safest. The
lncandescent street lights we have are as
near failure as possible, and have we not
heard that the company asserts 1t can do no
better with them, although glance into any
shop window having this form Of lighting
refutes the assertion?
The city under the contract is entitled to
32 candle power incandescents. 1t gets per-
haps 10 candle power. Somebody Is remiss
In official duty If a pro rata reduction Is not
made when paying the bills.
Near the south end of State street FIVE
loot gas Jet burns on the street lamp, paid
for by citizen. This is just about 20 can
le power. A glance will convince anyone
that its illumination Is at least double that
OF an incandescent light. Now with $50 TO
400 OF such gas jets with, say,-75 arc lights,
Judlclously located, can anyone doubt that
our city would be better lighted, cross
streets, alleys and all, than now?
Probably. also, 1t would be done with a
saving OF thousands of dollars each year I;
certainly with the saving of complaints that
arise as to an impartial distribution of eff
| tective lights. Too much of our present il
Elimination Is wasted in the upper air A
mixed service of gas and electricity is en-
| tirely practicable. A TAX PAYER.