The Washington times., 1895-06-04
GAS COMPANIES DICTATE
They Refuse to Bid Under CON-
missi0ners' Specifications.
OLD CONTRACT PREFERRED
Presidents Mclean and winship State
Why They Cannot Agree TO the
Street Lighting Terms-The Con-
troversy Is Mainly Upon Adoption
of a Revised Schedule.

1t is evident from the attitude of the gas
and electric light monopolies that the
District Commissioners will have to come
to terms, or the city viii depend alto
gethcr upon the moon illumination OF the
streets at night. II was manifestly
combination that wrought the results that
transpired yesterday at the District build
ing.
The Commissioners advertised for bids
under the terms of the appropriation act
for furnishing gas and electric lights for
street purposes for the ensuing year. The
date fixed upon for opening the proposals
was June 8. and at the hour named the
responses were read, only to discover
that the tactics employed last year had
been again resorted to, with sundry addi-
tions and amendments.
The Washington and Georgeto Tn Cas-
light Companies, respectively, notified
the Commissioners OF their refusal to bid
for the contract for street lighiug, and
the electric company said nothing and
offered no bid The Potomac Light aud
Power Company, which has dn electric
plant at the Virginia end of ihe eLain
bridge, wrote a letter asking that :lle time
for receiving proposals be extended
it having failed to see the advertisement
in time To prepare its bid.
NAPHTHA LIGHT BID.
Aside from this proposition, The Com
missiuners have no present assurance that
anybody will offer TO take the job Of light
ing the city streets unless the naphtha
producers may be counted. Bids were
opened for supplying the latter iilnmin-
alton, that of the Pennsylvania Globe
Gasight Company, ut S20.2 per lamp,
being the lowest
Mr. John R. Mclean, president of the
Washington Gaslight Company in his letter
of yesterday, says that latter a careful
consideration of the specifications, with
the many changes from the former con-
tract which have governed this service for
many years, and the many costly additions
thereto, which additions if carried out as
set forth in the said specifications, we
will say would, in our Judgment, increase
the cost of the service to such an extent
as preclude the Washington Gaslight Conn
pany from making proposal
President winship, of the Georgetown
Company, says:
I'VE find the changes are so radical and
oDerous that it is impossible for this COM
,aDy to comply with the same at the limit
which Congress has placed upon the Dis
trict to be paid per gas lamp for street
lighting, as the said specifications would
increase the cost of furnishing gas and
maintenance of lamps almost ten dollars
per lamp. Still, in order that the public
comfort may not suffer We most respect
fully submit proposal to continue the
street lighting upon the same specifications
that the streets have been lighted by for
the past four years and at the price fixed by
Congress"
WHAT THE COMPANIES PROPOSE.
The proposition made by Mr. Winship
is to furnish gas of the same quality and
candle power furnished all other con-
sumers at the rate of $20.o0 per lamp
per annum, the lamps to burn 3, 200 hours
per annum. This applies to all thorough
fares within the territory covered by the
Georgetown company west of Rock Creek,
through which the company now has gas
mains laid.
The Washington company submits
similar offer for it's territory.
Briefly stated, the history of the con-
troversy between the Commissioners and
the artificial light producers is that the
former have been Striving, as they al
Iege, according to their best judgment,
to secure a better service and at a rate
that viii still be within the means at their
command. They have also endeavored to
enforce an amended schedule of the hours
for lighting and extinguishing the lamps,
and have attempted to secure compliance,
according to their understanding of it,
with the law that requires the companies
to properly maintain the service.
The appropriation act prescribes that
each street lamp shall supply 5000 hours
of gas light per annum, at the rate of
$40. 80 per lamp The Commissioners claim
that time is improperly consumed in the
evening in lighting the lamps, and that a
similar waste occurs in the morning when
they are extingu ished. Believing they
had right to regulate this matter the MEM
bers of the board submitted revised sched-
ule last year, reducing the time for light
ing and extinguishing. This seemed to be
the rock upon which the split occurred. The