The morning times., 1895-11-12

Underground system, breakages being less
frequent, insulat ation better preserved and the
risk of accident lessened. Your committee
Is compelled to absolutely reject the figures
offered upon this point by the company par
ticularly as Mr.. Renshaw in the letter
alerady referred TO stated that the extra
outlay for an underground system Is fully
warranted by the freedom from inter
ferences caused by storms, fires etc.
In Chicago the municipality supplies
its arc lights at a cost of S96 per light
per year, and this amount includes the
cost of extensions. But this city is for
hidden to sell liahts to private individuals
and rs 4 consequence the plant is not made
n source of revenue, and, being worked
much below its capacity, the cost of the
city for each arc light is unduly swollen.
although about 80 per cent less than in
W ashingt ton. Again, the Chicago sys-
tenn is entirely unde rground, while very
large percentage of the local system is
carried on overhead wires.
From the foregoing it appears
,l l. Ihat the price of electric light fur
than Is furnished by private companies
elsewhere.
2. That the price elsewhere, light being
furnished by the municipality. is USUALLY
from ~ to 6O per cent of the price here
charged.
3. That the difference in the cost of
the plant owing to our underground system,
between Washington and other cities,
amounting as it does according TO cost in
Chicago, to but 10 per cent of the can
itallzation of the United States Electric
Lighting Company. does not Justify the
excessive prices paid in Washington
4. That there is ample reason TO believe
that the capitalization of the United States
Z 1ectric Lighting Company is swollen
far beyond the cost of its real estate and
construction of plant.
CONCLUSIONS.
We have reserved to the last the discus
sion Of the more important question with
the consideration of which your committee
is charged. To determine the proper price
to be paid for lighting is to answer a
question for q day or year. To settle
whether the municipality, or private cor
poration, should furnish lighting, is to
determine methods to. control during long
periods of years. s1i
If we would arrive at wise conclusion
we must not ignsre the teachings of ex-
perience. We learn from Shaw's Municipal
Government in Great Britain (page 2OO)
that it is almost the universal testimony
in Great Britain that municipal gas en-
terprises are a brilliant success They
have steadily reduced the selling price and
largely increased the consumption. Their
management has been as efficient and
economical as that OF the private companies.
They have been able, while selling gas at
low price, to pay expenses and interest,
accumulate sinking funds, enlarge the
plants, and make good all current deprecia-
tions, and still pay net profits into the
treasury. The price in the large
towns is generally from 90 to 20 cents per
thousand cubic feet
So in America, we find that the lowest
prices for gas are to be found where the
supplies the illuminant. Be-
tween two towns, presenting otherwise
similar conditions, but one with municipal
ownership and one with private owner
ship, municipal gas is sold for from 20 to
40 per cent. less money.
The same rule holds good with regard to
electric light. This branch of the subject
is so thoroughly investigated by Prof.
Parsons in recent articles in the Arena, that
'our committee can do no better than
recite O. few Illustrations given by him:
Standard arc lamps, furnished by the \
cost in Bangor S34; and
Dunkirk S46 per year, .swhile for the same
service Boston and New York pay respec-
lively to private companies $139 ana $15O.
Before furnishing its own lights Bangor
had for like serTice paid private company
$3.50. So In Chicago, private companies
rad received $3.50 for electric lighting