The San Francisco call., 1896-10-03
B. F. Wellington Says He
Was Charged Without
Reason.
Not Satisfied With the Meter
the Company Aver
aged
FIGURES CAUSE CONFUSION.
A Dissatisfied Consumer Sees in the
Gas Company's Methods an Argu.
ment for City Ownership.

Are San Francisco consumers of gas be-
ing systematically and arbitrarily over
charged2 B. f. Wellington, seed mer-
chant at 425 Washington street. declares it
his belief that they are, and he displays
an array of documentary evidence which
seems to lend color to his declaration. Mr..
Wellington has been in controversy with
the San Francisco Gas Light Company for
9 month, and the result of his experience
has been to convince him that it is a mat
ter of small moment that figures won't lie
so long as gas companies figure.
Mr.. Wellington's grievance against the
local corporation dates back TO about the
1st of Septem ber, when he received bill
for two months expenditure of gas at his
residence, 7I2 Franklin street. Ordinarily,
perhaps, Mr.. Wellington would have al
lowed the bill to pass unchallenged, but in
this instance the face of the statement
was covered with a confusing labyrinth of
figures and the merchants curiosity was
aroused. Moreover, the bill was tor an
amount far in excess of his usual bills for
light, ana he determined to ascertain the
cause thereof, if possible.
A popularity of this bill over previous
ones was that it was made out for two
months, ruse, Mr.. wellington believes,
TO cover up the arbitrary action which he
discovered upon the face of the bill.
From June % to August IL total con-
sumption of 1900 feet was shown upon the
bill. Of this only 200 feet was burned from
June 16 to July 20. Marginal notes were
on the bill, showing that on the latter date
the meter in Mr.. Wellington's residence
was found to register 35 per cent slow, and
1t was accordingly removed. There was
evidently nothing slow about the meter
which was substituted, for from July 20 to
August II II showed registration of 1900
feet. The total thus arrived at was 1900
feet for the entire period. To this much
of the bill Mr.. Wellington found no fault.
He was further prepared to accept the
company's own statement of the first
meters deficiency, and allow an addition
of 35 per cent on the bill for the period dur
ing which the meter was that much be-
hind standard.
The gas company had other ideas as to
the proper method of arriving at the
amount of gas which would pass through
a meter 35 per cent slow. They accord
ingly took the register of the new meter
and ascertaining from that the amount Of
gas the WeIl;ngtons ought to use in
month, added 1900 feet to the bill for the
period. The former meter showed
200 feet As corrected, Wellington was
charged for 1900 feet for that period.
When Mr. Wellington omprehended
the system by which his bill had been in
fated he waxed exceedingly wroth.
Thirty-hve per cent of 200 feet he fig
ured, would be 70 feet, and this he con-
ceived to be the amount which should
aave been added to his bill, a difference in
estimates of 1870 feet The system of
averaging the first month by the second,
he declares, would have been unfair
enough under any circumstances, as his
bill for the month preceding those in dis
pute shows a consumption of only 600
feet but during the entire period for
which the arbitrary addition was made
his family was out of town. 1t was while
he was occupying the premises alone, he
claims, that he was charged tor Just three
times the amount of illumination his Ell
tire family required the preceding month.
II used scarcely any gas during that
month" he SAYS. 81 was home very lit
tIe,and had occasion to use the gas only
to light me to led. / considered that if
the gas com pany could thus without show
of right or reason charge me for that
which had not consumed they couidand
probably did do so with others, and it was
a matter involving thousands of dollars
annually to consumers. l determined not
to submit to it and accordingly made
protest"
Mr.. Wellington's protest was not very
fruitful. The company refused to ac-
knowledge the injustice of their course,
but to save trouble agreed to deduct 1000
feet from the bill. This did not satisfy
Wellington. He maintained that the
only just guide to the amount of fuel con-
sumed was the meter, subject to correc-
ton as shown by their own test.
The com pany refused 10 accept this view
and he went away dissatisfied. Some lit
tie correspondence ensued between the
parties, ending in an ultimatum on the
part of the company to the effect that
they would throw off the entire bill if
Wellington would pay $40 he had owed on
a gas CRATE since 1892. A copy of this let
ter was exhibited by Charles L. Barrett,
cashier of the company, as an evidence of
the corporations desire to act fairlv
The effect of this document, however
is apparently offset by a receipted bill for
the crate in question which Wellington
possesses. An item of this bill is by de-
Wellington says, is the result OF the CRATE
having failed to meet the conditions of its
sale.
81 have been unable 10 reach an under
standing with this company" Mr.. We'll
llngton said, "and since discovering this
overcharge / have talked with other peo-
pie who have had similar difficulties.
his mdIIeI COuSlueT OF grave import
ance to gas consumers and most potent
argument in favor of municipal owner
ship of gas works. Hereafter l intend to
watch my meter more closely. / would
advise other consumers to do likewise"
Mr.. Barrett of the gas company SAYS
the fact that the meter registering IS per
cent slow does not necessarily show that
that is ali It's shortcomings. He rather
considers it a sign that the met is out
Of order and might not have raOieforad OF
all. He contends that the average system
used in Wellington's case was perfectly
fair one.