The evening times., 1895-11-25
COMPANIES IRE WlRRIN6
Two Electric Light Companies at
the District Building.
RESIST ISSUE OF A PERMIT
The U. $. Company Declares That the
Commissioners Have No Power or
Right to Favor the Potomac Com
pany-AtfOrneyS Argue as to the
ws-DaiIy Orders Issued.

The United States Electric Company ant
the Potomac Lighting and Power Com
pany appeared by representatives before
the Commissioners at 11:10 tins morn
ing. The question at issue was whether
the Potomac Company shall have permit
to lay a wire from the trolley wire on the
Tcnleytown Electric Road to houses for
lighting purposes. The Potomac Com
pany owns the electric road.
The United States Company was repre-
scented by Mcssrs. Henry Wise Garnett lnoi
j. X. Redington, and President A. A.
Thomas was also there. The Potomac
Company was represented by President o.
7. Crosby. Commissioners Attorney 3.
Z. Thomas. Messrs. Lee Hutchins and Da.
vid Towers and Mr.. Evan Tucker OF the
Northeast Citizcns' Association were also
present.
Mr.. Garneti opened the discussion with
recital OF legislation in regard 10 putting
M Poles and laying conduits for electric
wires. beginning with 1Ss3. He said an act
in 1883 provided for the putting under
ground OF all wires after september 10 IN
in that year. Alter the act of 1889 there
was M power with any one Ia put down
conduits. An Investigation had been made
To determine Just what ought To be- done.
TAKEN UP AGAIN.
In 1890 tie subject was taken mp again
by an electric commission composed OF tx
pcrts for the purpose of determining what
would be the best uniform system of con
veyjng electric currents. This act gave the
Commissioners no right whatever Ia grant
permits.
ON March 2. 1891. an act was passed di-
rcctiIrg thc commission to report oD wirins
houses, and added a provision that the
Commissioners night grant permits 10
lighting companies for additional condults
not to exceed five miles IN all.
- In 1883 the Commissioners ordered uf-
foreground all overhead wires. In 1883 this
was repea ted aud accordingly on March !,
1891, all wires were legally underground.
The only legal electric lighting Then In eX-
is.euce was by subways. Congress directed
that additional subways might be put IN Ia
the extent OF 1--WE miles and no more. This
must mea in addition to system OF wires
already underground. The Potomac Conn
pany was not Then in existence.
Bat the Commissioners attorney had de-
cidei under an act OF 1893 that the Potomac
might lay conduiis. This act MT.
read. Mr.. Garnet said ne could
not see how anything In that act could give
the Commissioners The power 10 grant
pcrmi: for anything.
lie then took Mr.. Thomas opinion of No
vcmber Is, in which the attorney says he
has discovered that the Potomac Com
pany has been furnishing electric lights III
for years. For this reason
he had changed his opinion and thought
tile permit could be granted.
Mr.. GaInrtt said they would show that
the Potomac Company hal not been FUR
At.fEs llht
any company which had been doing so
had been violating the law.
Mai. Powell asked II these laws applied
to the whole District or only 10 Wash
ington proper.
TO q question from Commissioner Trues-
dell he replied that lie had ovcrstated in
saying that the overhead wires of the Ten
road were Illegal.
He read a paper showing that the Poto-
mac Company was incorporated In 1884.
and said il was Impossible Tor the Com
misSiOnerS to grant them the permit asked
for.
LET DOWN THE BARS.
He argued that if this permit We're issued
the bars would be let down, and electric
lighting by this company could be extended
the District.
Mr.. Re'lirgton TOOK up the argument for
the United States Company TO show that
the records here do not show that the Po-
tomac Light aud Power Company owDs
dollars worth Of electric apparatus in the
city. He couldn't see how the Commission
crs could consider the granting OF permit
except under mandate OF court.
Congress had granted the right of cXtcn-
sion of conduitS not TO exceed five miles
for the legally existing system up TO Ger
tain time. and this limit by the terms OF
-he law Itself had been removed in April,
/ s32, so that the United States Company
may now extend its coDduits.
He then argued at length against the is-
Suance of a permit under the act OF 1898
cited by Attorney Thomas.
Orders We're issued ms follows today:
Water main assessments Cancelled under
the Burgdurf decision against lot / ., block
80. BrunkIand; remaining insta !lmcnts
against lot l, Wright subdivision Mount
Pleasant; part OF sublot 81. 81. and 81
su bdiyision Chichester, lots
AZ. 43, ii, square 551; all subiot s., square
723.
Contract with Norbcrg Manufacturing
extended to Sept tcmbcr u, 1895,
without penalty.
Seventy feet of ien-inch sewer be laid on
Fourteenth street. between IL and |.
Eighty feet of twent y-four-inch sewer DE
laid on Fourteenth street. between East
Capitol aud A streets north. and 400 feet
between East Capitol and y streets south.