St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-09-05

n saloon on Ohio street. The resolution
was referred to the COMMITTEES on
licenses, where it will die.
City Weigher Wanted.
A resolution anthori zing the mayor to
appoint man to weigh and inspect all
wood, coal and other supplies, who
shall Issue tickets for all loads sent to
public buildings, and report monthly. to
receive $50 month, was adopted. This
officer will be hired from month TO
month for such period as required.
The pay rolls and audited claims were
allowed.
The invitation to send delegates to the
deep waterways convention was &C
cepted, and Mr.. Markham moved that q
committee of two he appointed to attend
the convention. MeSsrs. Markham and
Ehrmanntraut were appointed. (
Mr.. Markham offered an amendment
to the rules by which all resolutions To
he read before the board must be signed
by member of that body. This amend
ment shuts out all anonymous matters,
which ut times find their way to the
clerks desk.
The board adjourned to meet OH
Thursday afternoon at $50.
Full Text Ofthe Report.
The committee on gas, having under
consideration the new Gas franchise for
which Mr.. Pugh made application, after
several meetings, last night presented
its report to the board of aldermen.
1t is very exhaustive document,
treating on every phase of the case in
fair and liberal manner. Its complete
text is given herewith.
TO the Honorable, the Board of Al
lar h., -
men: Your committee having under
consideration File No. 3563, being en-
titled IAN ordinance granting to Il. III.
Pugh the right to lay gas pipes in the
streets, and to manufacture and sell gas
in the city of st. Paul" respectfully re-
port to your honorable body as follows:
Your committee has held four public
sittings. upon the 2tth. 25th and 21th
| days of August, at all OF which it gave
| to all persons desiring to be heard upon
| this proposed ordinance, including r.
| ii. Pugh and his legal representative
| and the st. Paul Gaslight company and
its attorney. ample opportunity to eX-
| press themselves upon all phases OF the
| question under consideration. Indeed
| the statements and discussions before
your committee took a very wide range
and touched many questions connected
| with the manufacture Of gas aud the cost
| of constructing gas plants which were
| not necessarily connected with or even
| pertinent 10 the application under con-
| SideratioD. Your committee offered 10
receive any evidence that any person
| might desire to offer upon the subject.
| Mr.. PuSh'S attorney, however. content
| ed himself with an argument and cita-
tion of statistics from general statistical
works and newspapers; articles upon
| the subject OF the cost of manufacture of
| gas and of the construction of gas
| plants, and even from w. L. Stead's
work "lf Christ Game to Chicago"
none of which had any special or neces.
| sarY application TO local conditions.
The gas company, i'll reply, quoted from
| similar works, and the various officers
also made IA number of specific state
mehts as to conditions existing in St.
| Paul. which were not denied by Mr.
| Pugh or his attorney. The whole effort
of Mr.. Pugh seemed TO be directed to
| show that gas could in general be man
| ufactured and supplied at the prices
| named In the proposed ordinance and
that the st. Paul Gaslight company. by
reason OF alleged excessive capitaliza-
ton, could not put the prices down to
as low figure us those proposed by Mr..
Pugh. The effort of the gas company
was TO rebut these propositions of Mr..
uS u3 W It's OWu IleIlS Ill
| the premises, to show the unwiSdom
of the ordinance proposed, TO suggest
the various losses that might result to
| tine city if it. or any similar one were
| passed, 10 show that it was selling gas
at as low or at a lower price than the
average price charged by other gas
| companies throughout the country, and
to criticlse the standing and motives of
Mr.. Pugh and his associates.
| Your committee, knowing that the st.
Paul Gaslight company is local con-
Germ, and that the larger share of its
| bonds, as well as most of its stock, Is held
! by citizens OF ST. Paul, anu knowing. AS
practical business men, that the passage
| Of the ordinance would injure the credit
| of that company and depreciate the
| value OF its stock and bonds, rendering
| them. for the time at least, valueleSS as
collateral, felt from the beginning that
the burden of showing that the passage
of the proposed ordinance would result
in substantial and permanent benefit
to our city. considered from all points
| of view-Sh0uld rest upon MIR. Pugh.
The first subjects of Investigation by
your committee were the financial
standing of Mr.. Pugh and his hackers,
and the good or bad faith in which his
proposition was made. Mr.. Pugli'S at
tOrney, at the outset, frankly acknOwl-
edged that Mr.. Pugh himself had no
financial standing, but claims that he
had come here as the agent of one
Henry Z. Rev. OF Chicago. who. 1t is
claimed, is reputable man. Your
cUmmitte, while it had no other eyl-
dence that Mr.. Rev Is behind Mr.. Pugh
in this matter, has conceded such to be
the fact. No names of other hackers OF
Mr.. Pugh were furnished your commit
tee, although repeatedly asked for. The
ST. Paul GaSllght company claimed
at the outset of the investigation that
in case the council of this city, knowing
the provisions of that company $ char
ter, as to exclusive right to use the
streets. deliberately granted to another
person the right to lay gas pipes in our
streets, and the city's grantee attempted
10 do so, that company could recover
from the city damages for any actual
injury it could prove 10 have resulted
from such action. 10 cover this point,
anu 10 secure the city from damage in
the tearing up OF paVementS, etc., as
well as to secure evidence of good faith
upon the part OF Mr.. Pugh, the commit.
tee asked for statement of the amount
and character of the securities he would
deposit TO secure the city against loss
and would forfeit in case of non per
tOrmaDce of the provisions of this ordi-
| n"iieo uPon "iS pait' WI usu oaiu III
reply that he was unabl. 10 make such
a statement, although protesting to be
able to satisfy the committee in that
| regard. He offered. in case the council
would pass the ordinance. either to
make satisfactory statement ana prop
ositlon as to security III thirty days or
10 resign all rights under the ordinance
Your committee could not regard this
as satisfactory answer to simple
inquiry that Mr.. Pugh should have been
prepared 10 answer at once. particularly
as Mr.. Pugh had already had some
thirty TO forty days notice that your
committee would require such state
ment from him. This incident, and
other circumstances as well, reflect I'M
| favorably upon the animus of Mr..
Pugh's proposition, which, however. may
be proper. 1t should be said that in
hi ak is ri u Siat,