Cañon City record., 1900-03-08
THE LIGHT QUESTION.
Mr.. c. G. conkle Explains Something
About the Light Question
Over His Own Name.

About the Light Question
Over His Own Name.
EDITOR RECORD:
1t is not my wish nor that of the
officers of The Colorado Electric Power
Company who are associated with me,
to enter into . newspaper discussion
with 'E. E." or anyone else, who,
over a fictitious name, sees fit, in dis
cussing the electric light question, to
attack the honesty and integrity OF
men who for many years have been
recognized as representative citizens
of this community. 1t is, however,
no more than fSir TO the people who
are asked to vote upon the question
OF ratifying the ordinance granted to
me on May Is, 1899, to state our
position in the matter.
In December, 1885, nearly fifteen
years ago, there was granted to DR..
+. z. Blake, his associates and as
signs, the ordinance under which it is
presumed the present company known
as the Slater company is doing bust
ness. For fifteen years this company
has had monopoly Of the lighting
business in Canon City; furnishing a
quality of lights, which at the price
charged, should have been profitable
to the company il not to the people.
In May last made application to the
city council to grant me franchise
drawn on practically the same lines
a. the old Blake franchise, with the
exception that it contained provisions
granting to the city certain free
lights, and fixing . maximum rate of
about one-half that in the old Blake
franchise under which the Slater
company has operated. At the time
this ordinance came up for passage
Mr.. Slater and his attorney, Gen. Jos.
H. Maupin. ppeared before the coun-
Gil for H.. purpose of resisting the
passage Of the ordinance. They we're
given fail and complete hearing and
strenuousiy endeavored to convince
the council that it was q bad thing to
grant ordinances similar TO the one
under which they were operating. TO
what they called "grasping corpor-
ation,r evidencing their desire to
have the city allow the CORPORATION
which was under their control to con-
tinue not only. TO operats it plant
under its franchise, but 70 b. the
eoi.E tsrporation which should have
that privilege, thofsby making Il :
pars and simple monopoly. The city
council seemed 70 think that Il was
for ths ksek l1tsrests Of IL people
that competitive oo@pany - a.
lowo1 ~ fnto opGElf{oa . paaut
- ~ ~, ani - ~ en1inGnon
Wtteh h 0sdiseaes Ma lG
Thsreaftsr, l started IN good faith
TO carry out TIE provisions Of the
ordnance on my part by the con-
struction Of . line and had hoped
prior TO this time to b completely
equipped for the furnishing Of excel
lent lights at less price than has
heretofore been paid by the citizens
Of this community. The old corpora
tion. however, did not propose TO
submit to competition 30 easily, and
hence have been met at every turn
by injunction proceedings. There
has been no final hearing as yet upon
any OF the pending cases and those
interested in the Slater company know
the litigation is still in progress.
But a. far as the legal phases of
the question are concerned, take 1t
that the people are not at all inter-
ested. The franchise granted 10 me
In May was granted by the council in
good faith under the statute then in
force, and / have gone TO work in
good faith under the ordinance ex-
pecting TO comply with its terms
Knowing that the appellate courts
are far behind and that litigation
often causes delays Of from two to
three years, have thought 1t wise,
at my own expense, TO submit the
question 70 the people ~ to whether
the ordinance granting franchise to
me should be approved. 1t ia diff
cult for me TO see how any criticism
Sah ioh upou tuU City Couuoti ioi
their act in submitting to the people
for their approval or disapproval any
question in which the people are in
terested. In other words, such action
permits those who are represented by
tho council to say for themselves
what they want or do not want.
That is, the people viii be permitted
in this election to say whether they
wish to make Mr.. Slater's company
for time TO come what II has been in
the pasta monopoly in the lighting
business in Canon City, or whether
they are willing to grant like privi-
leges to others who stand ready to
spend their money in the community
and enter into competition in the
furnishing Of light. This is all and
nothing more. They are simply asked
to approve or disapprove an ordinance
ALREADY GRANTED.
It would aeem to come with poor
grace from "E. E." or those who
stand back Of his somewhat sbbrevia-
ted name, to say that this ordinance
Of ours ought not to be ratified by
kka ,....,.I.. k.r.,.n - kka f,nk xk.t