The record-union., 1897-10-31

attorney IOI ILC AocSNA
trio. Gas and Railway Company. 1t
is in regard to the proposluoh lie
has been advanced to nave the C1.'
erect and maintain its own eiecli-o
plant for city lighting and LOT po"
in operating its pumps, etc., ana oes'is
with facts and figures, showing ny
cities in other States are able TO insll-
tain electric plants at less e&peIlSe
than can those of California Inc
question is one of interest TO oacId-
rnentans. in view Of the contention
that Sacramento should have heI
own electric plant This matter Wlli
come up for consideration py eAe
Trustees on the Sth Of next mo1lth.
To the Honorable Board Of Trustees
of the City of Sacramento: take thls
occasion to submit to you on behaII Oh
the Sacramento Electric, Gas and Rall-
way Company, some facts and hgu
in relation to the matter OF the pio
posed establishment OF a hlulAAolp"
street lighting plant.
From time to time during the last year
the Mayor Of the City has said mucn 10
YOU officially. and to the public genef-
aIlv in advocacy of a municipal street
lighting plant, and he has given hgufes
as to prices in other cities, and has clteu
a number Of instances by which, ap-
parently. this city was shown to be at
q. disadvantage in the matter OF cost
of street lighting In none of his COM
rnuuications or addresses has he, or
any other advocate of municlpa1
lighting plant. made any analysis OF the
<,fC in COMPARISON
with the other cities cited as examples
nor has there been any showing of con-
ditions in Sacramento controlling me-
cbanicaI plants now and heretofore
owned and operated by the city as 10
cost, results and benefits NeltheI mas
there been any account taken Of the
economic conditions attendant upon the
general Industrial development incident
to the construction, installation anu
operation of the lighting plants now IN
operation here, and particularly thsI'
plant from which the city is now op-
tanning its light for streets
1t will be conceded by every sensible
man that it is no function Of any mu-
nicipal or other Government to engage
in any industrial pursuit, and that no
Government should engage in any bus
mess requiring mechanical operation
unless it be for the purpose of supply
ing water for the use of the inhabitants
and for public use. There are many
good reasons why every city should
own, or at least absolutely control, the
water supply. The reasons for this
are innumerable. In the first place,
water is a universal necessity, and san
itary reasons require the use of water
procured from sources other than wells
within the thickly inhabited districts.
No matter what the financial condition
Of the citizen may be, he must have
water, and it must of necessity be the
same quality for all. The city must
have at command a large supply for
use in case of fire, for street sprinkling,
flushing sewers, and other necessary
purposes, and all things considered
there are good reasons for municipal
ownership of the water supply; but even
the strong considerations named should
embrace the consideration Of economy
of operation, for If any city could OBJ
tain water for the use Of it's inhabitants
and for public use at prices less than
experience shows it to have cost under
municipal management, then even thai
element should be provided by private
enterprise. subject to municipal contro
as to terms and conditions that would
result in conserving the public Interest
at all times.
But with lighting. it is very different
No matter how cheap electric or ga.
Hight may be, 1t is well known tha
there can be no use of electricity or ga:
in any house without the expenditure
~ WIRING
piping and fixtures, and yet by the U.S.
of cheap lamp a good lgnt can be oo
tanned at little cost, and the matter O.
use of light and the quality or source
of supply is wholly with the consumer
end not subject to regulation or use O.
a particular supply as is the case witt
water.
Again, it has never been seriousl.
contended by any one that any munic
ipality would be justified in engaging
in the business of furnishing light t.
all as in the case of water, with al
the ramification and detail of a com
mercial lighting plant. Therefore, tn
only question to be considered in thi
connection is that of the prOpriety ant
wisdom of the city engaging in an un
dertaking that, as an abstract propo
sition, is not wise even in theory.
The area of municipal lighting terri
tory of this city compared with com
mercial arc lighting is, as a territor.
embracing two streets a block apar
and ten blocks long is to a territor.
twenty-nine blocks wide and thirty on
blocks long-for there are municipa
LIGHTS practically in the four corners o
the city. 1t is immateTial if there b
but one lamp at the northeastern ex
trernity of the city, one at the south
eastern. one at the southwestern, an
one at the northwestern The nu1nbe
of poles and length of wire is as grea
as if there were lamps at every inter
section
With a commercial lighting plant, a.
the wires and appliances necessary t
supply the inhabitants wherever foun
can be carried upon poles used for Inu
nicipal lighting. By so doing, there
mutual benefit between the citize
using lights for domestic or other pur
poses. and the inhabitants as a whole
for the more the same poles can b
utilized. the cheaper lights can be fur
nished: while if a full pole line and
wire circuit sufficient to carry one hun
dred arc lamps is only used for ten ar
lamps, the proportionate cost per lam
is increased accordingly, and charge
are based upon cost as a whole and nc
upon individual instances.
The situation in Sacramento can
best illustrated by the facts. Whe
the electric current was first brough
in from Folsom, this city was payin