Milford chronicle., 1891-02-27
water works piaeussion.

FHaN
q. by a tax payer in South Milford las
a. week and published in the CHRONICLE
ID He says il will take 81 500 for fuel eacI
r. year, which is false. The cost Of fbuck
n wheat coal is about 81 65 per ton in
10 Philadelphia IN lots of one hundred
= tons; to this add the freight-75 cents
per ton-and we have a cost of 81. 40
per ton delivered in Milford. Pea coal
: will cost about rs cents per ton more.
Now the consumption of coal with
boilers large enough to do the ork,
and which would not thave to be forcedl
would not exceed one ton per night to
run plant double the size of the cleo
trio light plant now here. (The pump
ing would be done with steam already
in boilers, after or before the lights are
turned Off or on, as the case NAV be.
This would show only 365 tons of coal
at say $3.50 per ton, or about S9l2
which is more than other plants are
consuming which are now In opera
tion on this peninsula. He next claims |
that incidental expenses will be nearer
$500 than 5000; which we do not be-
lieve will be the truth with a plant
that is capable Of doing not only the
exact amount it can be strained M TO.
but which would be capable of doing
double the amount of work resuired
of it and save forcing beyond its capac.
ity. Forcing beyond its capacity is
what makes large incidental account.
Here are his exact words:
The calculator of the Chronicle seems to
have lost sight Of one very important matter
or to have purposely avoided it. viz the an
nual average wear and tear ofthe plant, which a
none eau figure for period of IS years at 4
less that two aud oue-half per cent on the :
cost Of the works. These figures are care
fully gathered from well known authorities il
posted in such matters. h
The calculation for "wear and tear'' n
is very proper matter to consider; o
but we would like to know if there @,
would not be some wear and tear" on n
he plant ifit was owned by a private q
or would it last forever? I'll
here is wear and tear" on private
liant, who pays for it? the private
company or the consumer? We will
.nswer for him, that the consumer ~
'ays for the wear and tear" no mat ~
sr by whom the plant is owned. :,
'hese are pertinent questions. We p,
'ould ask ''*' what he knows about NJ
'ater plants that he speaks so author do
atively? Ne 5oU gyaafhfat he kAoas -.
rs about an electric light plant b0rsh0ula ,,a
V050; but his statements have been so M
ide of the truth heretofore, that we -
now how to allow for them. His
atement about the "wear and tearU sc.
accepted as it reads, would make cr
e present electric light plant, which oid
st about $lG5OO, worth just q per hri
Mt. less than that amount, or about ON,
60O-but the owners don't want to ho
i for that by long shot. They ,ho
mt the amount that the plant is pay 49,,
: the interest upon-about $l5, 900.
e writer then continued: [
he Chronicle ought to refresh its mem
byreferring to its article published the Tr
lting was made, and when the issr news was thr
eediHglY doubtful, demanding of the watt
,Ia nGs d 20 Pn[SHa5e 1;F lamps and BUY their Con
and yet it has cheek enough to claim large
it has always encouraged the electric sevel
..,,.,,., quar-
ere lI t1'is us 'aie oi woe he has hotel
d soou ."ins' anu ne uon't want to of o
len milk. We don't blame him ,~a,a
the people object to being bled to 49,.
hand believe that money can he D.,
d and better service given in cleo 49,
light; at the same time getting sae,t'
ectiOn from fire. We have re- -,
led our memory as he requested 49,, :
onsulting our files. We find that -,
writer of the above told deliber- - ~
n -, W. NV. %on say say 'ua','l wouid per y
be misrepresented what we did Th
which was briefly as follows:
e Town Council had a hitch in Blu
, way with the Electric Light
pauy, and it was not used in street On
ing. While this condition of af-
existed, the electric light people iI
now claim these same works are ,.,..
lg a handsome revenue on the in ,n,,.,,
lent outside ofthe public lighting restore,
pts,) then claimed that it would illness
ay them to run their plant all sons wi
without the street lights, and There
shut dow n about midnight. This lack of
ID Inconvenience, aud compelled blood o
te consumers to maintain two hard c
ms of lighting-thelr old oil lamps sleep.
he electric, Then a proposition "hat 81
made to light the town streets Is maxi
electricity FOR PART OF THE n.el', qnO'nei
r at a price, or ALL NIGHT for e-,.. -,
n lamp. This latter proposition i;,a i
CHRONICLE supported and de- restore
ed that they be burned ALL tonic
+ or not at all. This shows how purifier.
ritter ia the Meas and 44d9eytisey- rs
presented The CHRONICLE in its
nd for better service that put The [
$ into the electric light money letters o.
We further urged that unless W. ~
ectric lamps were burned all al peFso
that the to,yn sbo,l,I ,,o,,t,,,,a to presei
It was; lighting the streets all wa WI .,l,. :
with gasoline--which gave very
ervice, That is all.
submit the following as our es- o,--s - a,
of the revenues aud expense, if junction.
lants are owned by the town: Pectoral
on $4,000 at 4per cent 400 oo cough, d,
redemption of bonds ], 500. 90 of either
man man anu nOi'e''o' 1000 oSo 90 Happy
10000 chester;''
-al expenses or wear & tear 100 90 Foyeafals.
$500 90
from street lights S 1900 90
; from private lights. 1000 90
5 from water rents 1000. 90
receipts S $4,000
$500 90