Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-04-19
FRIDAY. ...".... APRIL 10, 1895
The EIectric.Llcht Question.


For some years our city Council has
had under consideration TIE question
whether II would not be better for the
city to own an clectrlc-light plant Of its
own than TO contract with private cor
porations for electric street lighting.
our City Gas-Works have proved a
profitable investment and II would seem
that a city electric-light plant would also
he. We think that but for the extraor-
.inarily large expenditure that we made
on the new City Hail the City Council
would long ago have been justified In
making an appropriation TO establish a
city electric-lisht plant But now IL IS
very necessary for US. as a municipality
10 guard our credit jealousy.
The cost Of the City Hall has made
economy essential In every department
If our government. and our Finance
Committee has therefore been unwilling
% recommend an appropriation TO estab-
,ish an electric-light plant just now.
True the City Council has been favored
with various propositions which, 1t is
claimed. would enable the city TO get
plant on very easy terms. and the Com
mon Council agreed TO one Of these
plans. but the Board Of Aldermen was
opposed to it and rejected H.
with some councilmen if is question
whether we can make our own electri-
city cheaper than we can buy IT, and
with these and other members there are
great misgivings as to the propriety OF our
rity's entering upon any large eXpendi-
.ure. at least until the result Of the re,
assessment OF lands. now being made, II
known
Thus it has come about that the two
branches Of our city Council are "at
,oggerheads." and to force the question
10 an immediate settlement the Common
rouncn has declined to vote an apprO.
frlation 20 continue payments 70 the
Electric company for street lighting.
iAnd so the Committee on Light con-
.iders that IT is justified in ordering the
siscontinuance Of the electric street
fights. Mayor Taylor-many thanks TO
tlm-has. however. come 10 the relief OF
sbe community and gotten the promise
of the electric company that IL will fur
nish street lights until the old street
1mps can be equipped for service again.
We are ltti4Nl lilAA tlll7 lAA lN'N "a
abandoning electric lights and going back
10 gas Mghts-if persisted in-will give
Richmond a bad advertisement. The
outside world Will not understand it, and
will ascribe the change TO 'old fogy-
Ism"
The Dispatch is a friend Of city owner
fhip Of an electric-light plant. We have
lnly been Withholding advocacy Of the
fcheme until the Finance Committee re-
ported that the citys financial condition
iyould make the investment a prudent
pne. We have not attempted To analyze
lhe various propositions that have been
before the city Council. We put ou
Trust IN the Finance Committee, and Will
% continue 10 do until we find that it is
mistaken in its judgment or isl unworthy
yf the confidence that we repose in it.
The Finance Committee knows bette>
Than the average councilman how great
IL our credit was endangered by tbs
building OF the city Hall; how hard 1t
rvas IN recover our lost ground, and how
Easily frightened investors would be AT
the thought that there was to De SOU"
smother large issue of bonds.
Thousands or our people iVon "P'" ~
proposed cutting off OF electric hsh'S
land that. too, before the old sas-iampS
IRE put in order for use again as an at
tempt TO force the Board OF Aldermen
md the Finance Committee 10 10 'ha'
(which they have hitherto refused to do
such a course. II persisted in' viii orins
rreat reproach upon our authorities. SO
~e trus, that it will be abandoned forth
Win and that an arrangement will BE-
,uade with the electric company 10y
.ybich our streets shall BE- lighted as
rs,,al until there has been ample time to
p,sr,,ss and decide the questions at issue.
And these questions are, Should the city
NJ Richmond own and operate an cleo
srie-light plant? II so, do our finances
warrant Us In establishing such a plant
q; this time?