Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-06-09


This closed the discussion and the report
was adopted and the bill sent back to con-
ference.
In the House.
The same report of disagreement was
made in the House in the midst of a fill
| buster by the democrats against the Under
| wood-Aldrich contested election case and
| there was spirited struggle made against
| Its reception. Finally Mr.. Dalzell, occupy
| Ing the chair, ruled the report to be in
order. and Mr. Pitney, one of the confer
| ees, moved that the House recede from its
| provision to which the Senate objects, to
the following effect Provided further,
that the entire service Of electric lighting
authorized under this appropriation shall
| be let after due advertisement, to the low
est responsible bidder therefor: Provided,
| 1urther, that no contract shall be made for
electric arc lighting at a price exceeding
| the rate hereinbefore specified" In lieu of
| TINS paragraph Mr.. Pitney proposed the
| following amendment:
Mr.. Pitney's Proposition.
| provided further, That the service of
| electric lighting In those streets and places
| west OF Rock creek now lighted by arc
| lights and necessary extensions of said
service, shall be let, after due adv ertiss-
| ment, to the lowest responsible bidder but
| no contracts shall be made for such lights
| at price exceeding 500 per lamp per year
lor each arc light of candle power equal to
| OF greater than that now furnished; and
PROVIDED further. That the Commission
ers of the District may, under such reason
| able restrictions they may prescribe,
| authorize any existing electric light com
pany' organized under the laws Of the Dis
| irlct OF Columbia, to maintain and use its
| exlstlng poles and lines and extensions
| .Heleoi, eltnef overhead or underground, in
places outside Of the fire limits of the city
| Oh :" ashlngton. and by underground con-
| Quits only inside the said fire limits such
| hnes not to be extended in any part of the
| District of Columbia except in that portion
| or the same lying west of Rock creek
| provided further That from such limos
as may be maintained or established under
/ authority OF this act electricity for lights
ana power shall not be sold to any con-
| sumner at rates exceeding 81 per cent of
prices charged generally in the city of
Washington for such lights and power on
the lst day Of January. 1895; and
provided further, That the District fire
alarm and messenger service may be es-
tablshed along the overhead or under
ground lines hereby authorized to be main
tanned and constructed, without charge for
pune rent or conduit rent to the District"
Point of Order Defeated.
Mr. Richardson promptly made the point
oi order against this amendment that it
was not sermane to the pending PROPOSE
ton The chair (Mr. DalzelD ruled that the
point OF order was not well taken, as the
matter in controversy related directly to
the price of electric lights and the noetbod
OF letting the contract
MI Pithey took the floor to explain a.
some length the relations existing between
the two electric lighting comp3njas and
the Commissioners, which are already fa
HlHar to the readers of The Star, He
concluded with the following brief exDIana-
;, " ms proposition: The amendment is
intended TO permit the District Commits
siohers 10 let, upon competition so much
or the lighting business as lies west of
10 go creek, and to grant permits for I'M
1,,it
limits extend. Beyond those fire limits .hev
may give permits for overhead construc-
ton as well as underground"
Alter somewhat heated discussion on
the Parliamentary status of the amend
ment between Messrs. Pltney and Richard
son, Mr.. McMilln said:
As to Local Monopoies.
The gentleman has referred to some ex-
traordinary or peculiar decision whereby
only one company has the power to furnish
electric light in this District. l want to
know why such monopoly is given and
why the monopoly is respected"
THAT monopoly does not happen to be
respected by me. and has not been, and /
nave attempted to break 1t up answered
MI. Pltney. That is the very purpose of
the amendment 1 have offered"
You propose to break 1t up in the
suburbs, but it lives still in the city" re-
torted Mr.. McMillin.
We'll. that Is the very best we can do at
this time" said MIR. Pitney. IF the gen
tleman has a better proposition to make he
can make it."
Mr.. DOckery on the Situation.
Mr.. Dockery here made a statement. He
said: I'm further answer to the question of
the gentleman from Tennessee, 1 may saw
that the electric monopoly is not the only
one that has f1ourished in this District.
There is gas monopoly in this city, full
fedged and with ample powers. Recently
bill was passed reducing somewhat the
profits received by this Company for fur
nishlng gas light to the citizens and the gov
eminent. but 1 understand the claim is now
made by the company that the bill not only
includes the cost Of gas furnished to public
buildings in the city, but also applies to
the street-lightins service. l am glad to
say, however. that our friend, the gentle
man from Wisconsin CMr. Babcockl and
the gentleman from Tennessee CIr. Rich
aldson) both insist that that claim is not
warranted by anything that occurred in
the conference committee or by the terms
Of the law itself.
Il had no knowledge that my colleague
was to offer this instruction to the commit
tee or conference. but l heartily indorse it,
Ihls electric light company has unreleut-
1ngly pursued its honorable competitor in
this District. 1t is employing. to use
homely but very expressive phrase. the
dog in the manager policy. The L nited
States Electric Company cannot go into
the territory covered by the amendment of
tle gentleman from New Jersey, under q
decision of the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict neither can the other company but
the old company proposes to keep out the
new company from the territory not now
occupied except in very limited way
Backing Up the House.
Il hope the House will stand by thS
amendment of the gentleman from New
Jersey. l think it is entirely proper and
opportune, and is in the interest of the peo-
pie Of the District and against the existing
monopoly.
Il may say further tlat the committee
would perhaps have been able to agree in
the conference just closed but for the fact
that the contention is made for a larger
compensation for lighting the streets ii an
the conferees of the House thought was
warranted. The recent bill, which became a
law by the approval of the President on
yesterday, reduces the cost of gas in public
buildings-and l desire to thank the gentle
men from Tennessee and Wisconsin for
what they have accomplished-re iuces the
cost OF gas used in public buildings The
House conferees desire to make a CORE
spending reduction in the cost of lighting
streets. That is the issue in part which ia
now delaying an agreement which l hope
however, may be accomplished at the next
meeting of the conferees"