The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-06-22

high; on the contrary he makes an eS-
ception in the opening of the communi-
cation in this particular.
To attempt TO cut down the veto and
present it in a concentrated form would
be to rob it of some Of its juiciness, 50
it is given as written:
THE VETO.
Salt Lake City. June q.
To the Honorable City Council:
Gentlemen herewith return, dfsap-
proved, uhe lighting contract between the
city and the Pioneer Electric Power
company adopted by the council on The
18th inst My failure 10 approve is not
because the price Is unreasonably nigh,
but for the reasons following:
The contract is not. in my opinion. such
n one as affords such protection to the
city it is entitled 30. Some provisions
looking TO that eno were originally IN
serted by the city engineer and were al
forwards stricken out at the solicitation
of the Pioneer company's attorney This
IS in fact 4 contract dictated by that
company. The conditions stricken out or
changed are as follows:
First-That the city might have the
right TO renew the contract from time TO
time for nine years.
This is entirely eliminated
Second-It was originally provided that
the lighting should not be sublet to any
other company. and that the contract and
the money which might become due I'M
der it should not be assigned. This has
been changed in such manner as 10 per
nit these things to be done with the
consent of the council. and she effect of
such change is 10 open the Way Tor SUD
letting the lighting and assigning the
contract in whole or in part TO the SAT-
Lake & Ogden Gas & Electric Light COM
pany. There is no use in attempting 70
disguise the fact that this IS the Oh
ject of these changes. and with our past
experience with this corporation, es2ec-
iallv during the lighting year Just eX-
pired, il must be apparent that the city
cannot and will not secure the service 10
which Il is entitled from the latter com
pany. It IS not stating the case 100
strongly TO say that the light furnished
by that company TO the city corporation
arsl commercial users during the past
five years and particularly during the past
year has been a delCsiOn and fraud
and it is quite evident 10 me thitt
ii is intended by this contract 10 con-
tinue the same rascally service IN the
Indeed. it IS provided by the contract
that the Pioneer company may use 10 OF
the lamps now in use by the SAT- Ike q
Ogden company. and il Will not SURPRISE
any intelligent person in this community
were the whole antiquated plant ana
IaranheTnalia of this company, lncluulhs
poles and wires. TO ie continued IN use
during the three years ii has TO run
That such is the intention OF me com
btnats3n hereinafter referred TO. nave
no manner of doubt. and II IS duty rest
ing 1Inon your honorable body TO protect
the municipaiity against such an impo-
eiIlon. .-...oo+
Third-The tenth section OF tbs. contract
as originally drawn, provided that ques-
lions of difference or any controversies
witch might arise between the CITY ana
the contractor in reference TO the per
Torrance or non-performance OF the WoIh
To which they relate, should be referred
10 the light inspector. TO DC appointed pS
the city. and his decision thereon should
he conclusive upon both parties mis-
10 entirely stricken our.
so that except for the bond OF SlOVV,
which the contractor is required 10 give
for the faithful performance OF the work,
there is absolutely no guarantee III ti1s
agreement that the city may obtain what
II contracts for In contract OF TINS
kind a bond does not adequately protect
the city for the reason: That II the CON
tractor fails TO comply with the terms IN,
posed upon il. recourse TO the bonu WOuiu
simply involve the parties IN years 81
litigation and pending an adjustment IN
that way the city might be contlnuaily
imposed upon as in the past, and be help-
less TO avail itself of contracting Win
other parties. ,,-., :. -,
agreement whereby either the inspector,
the city engineer or other competent per
son may arbitrate matters of difference
between the parties. and such aroltra-
tom should be conclusive on both.
Il should also be provided that II the
contractor fails to perform his part OF the
work a required by the agreement. that
-be effx council may al its option, re-
woke the contract. and that in sucn case
the contractor SHAH have no recourse
ofherwise These are provisions which
are commonly inserted in contracts OF
this kind. and / can imagine no Nald
reason why they should not Obtain mere
Trourth-It IS a matter of public no.
torierv that the Salt Lake and Ogden GaS
and Electric Light company. the Ploneer
Electric Power company. the Cluzens
Electric Light company and the Big Cot
fonw0od Power company have formed or
are about TO form combination or trust,
the object OF which is TO control the pro
dl,rfion OF electricity and gas in this com
,.unifv and by such control dictate the
prira II which these commodities shall
be sold. These are the means adopted 70
drive out competition and render the pup
lie subject 10 the combination. as 10
what price shall be paid for t5eSe neces-
stiles In this aspect II IS not always OF
the first importance that the price OF an
article may be lowered for the time be-
ing because il IS usually IN the power
Of the combination to raise II. and the
ultimate result = disastrous as Wen as
dangerous TO the well being Of the COM
inunitv by the offensive. aggressive and
unreasonable exercise Of the great power
that combined capital enables these trusts
to WELD.
Mere reduction in The price OF municipal
lighting may he dearly paid ior by the
assessor, -, OF unreasonable charges upon
every conn, erciai user IN this city, and
the absorption OF the control over these
necessities by an all powerful combina-
ton Of CAPITAL.
But it may be answered that the fran
chise of The Pioneer. Big Cottonwood and
Citizens companies limit the price which
they can charge for city and commercial
lights That IS true but there is no
such limit upon the Salt Lake and Ogden
Gas ard Electric Light company. and
because Of this. il would Only be neces-
sary for the companies which are limited
as to price 10 refuse to bid. and the
Salt Lake and Ogden company would then
have clear field. and at such price as
the combination desires to impose.
The state has set its face against such