The Ocala evening star. [volume] (Ocala, Fla.) 1895-1943, 1897-07-23
GAS VS.. ELECTRICITY.
President Mckay Replies to Superin.
tendent NOrcrOss.
TO the Editor of the Star:

TO the Editor of the Star:
Under the heading of "Elec-
tricity or Darkness" you have
published a most remarkable ar
ticle from the arratic brain of the
latest and freshest of electric
fresh representatives. Mr.. Nor
cross must admit one of three
things: That he has taken the
citizens of Ocala to be extremely
gullible and ignorant Or he must
be woefully embued with the same
qualifications himself Or that he
has wilfully misrepresented facts.
The Gas Co., composed of the
following well known citizens:
w. s. Bullock, D. A. Miller, Z.
r. Waterman, D. w. Davis,
Duncan Campbell, A. II. Bird
sey, G. P. McGrath. J. V. Burke,
G.. L. Bittinger, D. E. McIver
and the writer, claim they can
light the city for about two
thirds the cost of the electric pro-
posed contract, and give very
much better service than that
proposed by this company when
ever the city SO desires. Against
these gentlemen's word this
young jack-in-the-box states that
Ocala must be in Egyptian dark
ness or use tallow dips unless his
company secures the city's con-
tract for the next two years.
(The tallow dip expression has
been used about a hundred times
in the city council as being equiv
alent to the electric service hlth-
erto rendered the city. Mr..
Norcross also reminds our citi-
zens of our enormou Gus indebted
ness, our repudiated paper, our
absolute unreliability and inabil-
ity to help ourselves without his
company's aid or assistance. He
also points out his company as a
wonderful creation, who, in a
kind of Jones-pays-the-freight
style, pays their bills and is
therefore absolutely essential to
our welfare and to give tone to
our city; with their representa-
tives' able assistance. In the
above manner this fresh young
la-de-da comes out in his blissful
ignorance with his company's
usual compliment of bluff of
ELECTRICITY or Darkness" We
have had electricity mixed with
darkness and an occasional
sprinkling of whistling for kero-
sene and candles since several
wears and no matter how fresh a
representative the company fur
n;shes us with we cannot forget
the past nor do think we should
trust them for the future. Mr.
Norcress willfully or ignorantly
misrepresents facts when he
claims that the Gas Co., will or
can charge what they please for
gas unless the electric light con-
tract is approved, and thereby
maintain their competition. The
facts are that the Gas Company
now is charging So per 1000 for
commercial lighting and cannot
by their franchise charge a cent
more: furthermore their fran
chise only allows 81 per 1000 fo1
city lighting, which is cheaper
than gas is sold in New York by
the million feet, notwithstanding
the fact that materials costs us
about one hundred per cent. more
here than in New York.
Our prices for commercial
lighting, as is well known to oul
citizens, has compelled the elec
trio people to cut from 45 to 6s
per cent. of their old prices, ane
the Gas Co. is the only obstacle
to their going back to their ole
gouging stand, as evidenced by
the prices Incorporated in con
tract submitted for the approva
of the voters. Why can't they
explain if the prices the Ga:
Company compel them to adop
arc satisfactory that they incOr