The Portland daily press., 1898-09-20
IN FAVOR OF CHEAPER ELECTRIC
LIGHTING.
n. Il. T,l1,4a.. :. E Il. a..
To the Editor Of the Press:


the article in recent number
of the Press signed by Mr..
W. +. Milliken, president of the
Consolidated Electric Light Co., which
opposes municipal ownership and light
ipe. In common with most of our citi-
zshs,I am interested in the question now
before the taxpayers of Portland as to
whether we shall have our city lighted at
a less price than we are now paying or
continue in the old expensive way. For
one,1 I cannot accept MIR. Milliken's argu-
ments, as they are necessarily those OF
prejudiced person interested in retaining
the business at the present rates, which
are generally conceded to he high for the
poor service given, his figures to the con-
trary notwithstanding. We should natu-
rally expect at this time that those inter-
ested in the Consolidated would take just
this attitude to make the taxpayers be-
lieve they are getting most favorable
rates and good service when it is well
known that such is not the case.
AS understand it the Consolidated is
today bonded for about $500, 900, which i S
generally believed is all the entire proper
ty is worth or cost. In addition to our
citizens paying interest on this sum, be-
penses and depreciation, we have for
years been paying dividends on about
$3.50, 900 of common stock, which is en-
tirely "water" if the bonds represent the
value of the plant. Now the absurdity
of asking Portland people to believe they
are getting low prices when every one
knows who has taken any pains to find
out that the price of house and store
lighting just across the bridge in Deering
is about one-haf what our citizens are
paying for the same thing. In addition
to the difference in price there is great
difference in the quality Of light fur
nished. On several occasions recently
when visiting friends in Deering have
noticed particularly the pure white
lights, so different from the yellow ap-
pearanee of the incandescents in our city
stores. Our attention is not called to this
fact in our homes as rates for house light
ing in Portland have been SO high as to
be prohibitive. Now what causes the
great difference in price between Dsering
and Portlanda In Deering there are two
competing companies, both basing their
rates on current obtained from water
power. In Portland we. have but one
company, which produces its power from
COAL and up to the present time has had
no competition, with consequent high
rates. What this competition will do is
shown in Deering by the recent reduction
in price of street lights from $21. so per
incandescent light to SIG per annum, the
former. price having prevailed for several
years. This was entirely due to the low
bid recently made by the new company,
who lost the contract although their price
was the lowest offered.
In the face of all this we are assured
that our rates are as low as are enjoyed
elsewhere, and an elaborate argument is
made to prove this, together with list
OF cities as badly off as ourselves. We
need not go as far as Topeka, Kansas. for
rates and services; all we have to do is to
go across Desring bridge to ascertain
these facts I am told that there are only
about so houses in Portland that are
lighted by electricity, simply because 1t
is SO expensive; while in Deering there
are nearly 300, ii not more. and new ones
are being constantly added The people
there can affo I'd to use electric lights and
do, the people in Portland cannot and
don't. -
The Consolidated people are opposed to
municipal plant. WhyP There are but a
very few of our citizens interested in the
Consolidated Company, and yet they are
solicitous for fear the city shall make the
mistake of attempting to do anything on
it's own account to reduce expenses and
save money for its taxpayers and users
of light, which latter class includes every
body. Electric light is not such an ex-
pensive thing but what all of our people
should have the benefit of it, and the day
is not far distant when, with the great
strides that have been made in electrical
improvements, who shall have it and at
prices within the reach of every one.
Now the strange part OF this is that the
offer as presented to our city government
by the new company-the Cumberland IL
Eliminating Co.-does not contemplate
having the city go into municipal light
ing as enlarged upon by Mr., Milliken in
his article. Instead of this the plan is
that the city shall own it's own poles and
wires, which would cost from $75, COO to
500, 600 according to whether the pres 9nt
pole system be used for underground con-
Quits (Which without any question
Re@A
streets) and buy it's current wherever it
can get it the cheapest, as it now does
its coal and other supplies. The new
company offers to pay five per cent an
nua1 rental for the uss of these same
poles or condults for running their wires
| on or through them to furnish light and
power to consumers, /. g., aftsr they be-
come the property of the city. In this
| way the city would be under no expense
for interest on it's equipment bonds, as
the rental would take care of that charge
and more; and the further income derived
from the rentals of these poles and con-
Quits would be more than sufficient to
maintain them and cover the item of de-
probation The city is offered current for
S25, 600 against S43 TIA paid last year for
the lighting of our streets and public
buildings. Isn't this quite an annual
saving-$18, 77U, nearly one-half the pres
ent price on an Investment of $75, 0O0 to
500, 600? The outlay which the city
would make on it's, poles and conduits
would thus be saved to them in five years
or less in reduced cost of lighting. II
the Consolidated Company, as represented
by Mr.. Mtlliken, is SO DESTROYS of the
city's welfare as to keep them out of the
-