Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-11-30
LIGHTING CITY DISCUSSED
Continued from Page I

Sontiflued from Page
the city contract, per cent. upon their
gross receipts from the sale of electric
l.y, or per cent. upon the gross
alnouht turned into the treasury Of the
company from all sources.
had the Norfolk Heat, Light and
rover Company been the lowest, and
nad II been unnecessary to use their
shulng or adjustable bid. they could
nave claimed that their per cent.
meant per cent. upon the amount of
.he city contract, but as it stood, that
was not enough to bring them as low
as the bid of our company. AS it was
necessary to make up a difference of
Sl'Z9f. they moved their sliding bid so
as 10 guarantee that the gross receipts
should be at least $4,000, per cent. of
winch is $1,000. Had 1t been necessary
10 make up a difference of $4,000 they
.,isht Just as well have guaranteed
lnat their receipts should be 100000.
III these gentlemen had stated in their
original bid what amount of gross re-
eelpts they would guarantee, and this
amount had been sufficient to bring
.hem to u lower net price to the civ
man our own big, we should have rails.
GU no objection. But we do respectfully
Seesest that the proposed report OF two
vi your committee, recommending TINT
me oirer Of the Norfolk Heat Light
"na Power Company be accepted, pro
p.ueo mat they guarantee that the 2
PEI cent upon its gross receipts will mot
We less than $500 per annum
80, changes entirely. the bid of that
1,pahS and changes it after they
Ma sihu chance to know what the
o,u vi our company is. That il docs
t .ia 1t cannot be disputed, for by
IHe terms of your report the Norfoli,
neat, Light and Power COMPANY has
me privilege to make such guarantees
or NOT. This could not be the case if
'ney mad made it a part Of their bid
Anowing that these gentlemen guar
aneea return to the city of per
cent. on $4,000, even then IT is NOT
IIedr lnat the city is making the con-
.tact most favorable to itself. Ac
eoruing TO the bid on open arc lights
our company's bid is s4,S01 lower than
t,ia. OF the Norfolk Heat, Light and
o"er company, and on the enclosed
arc lights our bid is s1.297 lower ,,aI.
annum. Two per cent. on s75 600 gross
income drom the Norfolk Heat. Light
nhu rover Company, amounting 10
sl,ooo' would give q difference in their
favor or SOB. provided, however. that
no arc lights are added by the CITY
u inn me next three years. If. dur
city adds only forty-one (and it is
withln all probability that they will
add larger number than that). the
Norfolk Heat. Light and Power Com
pany, Charging as they do, So more
per annum per light, will stlll he
found to be higher than our bid. and
each additional light added by tho
city during the course of the three
year contract will make n difference
in our favor that much greater.
NOW, taking up the open arc-light
question: II the city shall adopt that
system. as already shown, the bid of
me NORFOLK Railway and Light Com
phhy IS S4.S01 per aDnum, or $14403 for
the three years less than the Norfolk
Heat, Light and Power Company. If
allowance is made for the 81 500. above
mentioned. which has been introduced
since the bids were opened, the saw
ing would still be s3,3O2 per annum,
or diiferepce IN our favor during the
continuance OF the contract of Sc. 9O3
The enclosed arc light Is by no
means beyond the experimental stage.
Only about 80 out of 1000 cities in the
United States, which are lighted by
electricity. are at present using the
enclosed arc lights: some of these
are only partial users. Philadelphia,
which is included in the above 80. has
1922 open arc and only % enclosed
arc lights.
we beg to submit that, if the
privilege is granted to any one OF the
bidders to alter or amend his bid,
after seeing the bids of the other com
petitors for the business the same
privilege should be given to all the
bidders.
AS citizens of Norfolk, as taxpayers,
and as directors of corporation
having large interests in your COM
munity, which interests 1t is our duty
to protect, we have right to expect
at the hands of a committee of the
City Council fair business treatment
treatment that they themselves would
demand at the hands of other people,
and we ask nothing else.
I'VE are the lowest bidders, and we
do feel that we should be awarded the
contract, but in no event should we
be deprived of the contract without
being given the same opportunity 10
amend our bid as is given to Others
Respectfully submitted
(Signed) ''E. ST. JOHN,
WALTER II. DOYLE,