Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-01-21
Local Measures Considered in the
House.
las BILL TAKES UP MUCH Time
Finally Recommitted to the Com.
mittee With Amendments.
SLIDING SCALE OF PRICES

man Babcock called up first the bill author
| izing the Washington Gaslight Company
| to increase it's stock "and for other pur-
| poses
The bill was published I'm fun in The Star
| last week. In brief it authorizes the WASH
| ington Gaslight Company to increase its
| manufacturing and distributing plant as
| the present and future needs and growth
| of the District of Columbia may require,
| and in so doing to construct and maintain
such additional improvements. mains and
| conduits as the Commissioners of the Dis
| trict may consider necessary. The second
| section authorizes the company, upon the
| assent of majority in value of its stock
| holders, to purchase and hold the capital
| stock of any other Illuminating company
doing business in the District of Columbia.
| and in such event to issue and sell so much
| additional capital stock may be neces-
| sary to complete the purchase This sec
| tion also protects the creditors OF such
| companies and prevents the abatement OF
| any suit against such company. Section
authorizes increase in the capital stock
| of the Washington Gaslight Company with
| in the limitations prescribed by the section,
| and provides the methods by which the
| increase of capital stock shall be made
| Section 4 authorizes the recovery of dam
| ages to paVementS or trees by reason OF
leaks from gas mains.
Commisxioncrs' Recommendations Not
| Adopted.
! In their report upon the bill the Commits
| sioners said:
| zone Of the objects Of the bill appears to
| be to permit the consolidation OF gas COM
panies and then permitting them to unite
with the electric lighting companies now
doing business in the District of Columbia.
The advisability of permitting a consolida-
| ton of the gas companies with the electric
/ Herht nil fS
| misSioners are not prepared at this time to
recommend. although they approve the pro-
| posed consolidation Of the gas companies"
The committee did not adopt the Com
missoners views upon this feature, al
though the Commissioners amendments in
| other directions were Incorporated in the
| bill.
Mr.. Pearre of Maryland took the floor to
4 explain the general features of the bill.
Referring to section 2, he called attention
| to the authority therein granted for COM
bnation with other Illuminating companies.
| Mr.. Moody of Massachusetts, asked how
many Illuminating companies there were in
the District. Mr.. Pearre said there was
one gas company in Washington and one in
| Georgetown, and that the latter company
charges $1.25 for gas. but after this COM
| bination the price will be reduced to 81.
Mr.. Moody's Inquiry.
| Mr.. Moody asked If the bill authorized
combination with electric light companies.
| and, receiving an affirmative answer, called
attention to the Commissioners comment
upon that feature of the bill
Mr.. w. A. Smith of Michigan questioned
the provision in the bill authorizing capi-
| talization upon the basis Of net earnings.
He thought it very unwse provision.
| Mr.. Pearre said the committee had felt
that no better basis for capitalization than
| the net earnings could be found. The pro-
| vision in question was as follows:
| That the total amount of the stock OF
| said company herein authorized to be :s-
sued shall not exceed its actual value, TO
| be aScertained by its board of directors by q
| capitalization upon per centum basis OF
| the average net earnings of the company
| for three years next preceding the issue or
issues of said stock, the said capitalization
by said board of directors to be made under
| the supervision and approval of the Su-
| preme ourt of the District of Columbia upon
petition therefor by said company under
such regulations as the chief justice and
| the justices thereof shall prescribe"
Mr.. Moody, referring to that section, said
| that he understood there nothing IN
| the existing law relating to a per cent
basis, and that this section directed the
| court to approve capitalization upon that
| basis.
Here is a BILL" cried Mr. Moody. raising
| his voice above the din and confusion or
| general conversation on the floor, which
| authorizes this company to increase its
| stock from s2.600000 to SS.0OO,o00, and this
House is paying no attention TO 1t.
Mr.. Gaines Of Tennessee wanted to know
| who was back of this bill.
| Mr.. Pearre said tndt directors OF the gas
| company had appeared before the commit
tee to ask for the legislation He had heard
of no clamor from the outside in its behalf.
Mr.. Grosvenor called attention to the pro-
vision which directed the company TO
| make these changes, and he feared the use
| of that word would be construed in the
| future to indicate congressional control
! over this company and prevent attempts at
competition.
May Strike Out the Provision.
| Mr.. Pearre said that if the House feared
| to authorize the combination Of the gas
| and electric light companies the committee
| would not object to striking out that pro-
vision and providing for the consolidation
alone of the two gas companies. He said
| the committee was not aware of any ne
| gotiations pending for consolidation OF
| ne gas and electric light companies
| Mr.. Pearre said the committee had an
| amendment to propose which would limit
| the increase of capital stock TO one issue,
based upon the net earnings of the COM
panies for three years preceding the year
| 1901.
| Mr.. Pearre said that it might be wise to
| temporarily lay aside the bill until the
various suggestions for its perfection might
| be composed. Half dozen members
sprang to their feet and vigorously object
| thought 1t would be better TO recommlt
| the bill to the committee for further hear
| ing and consideration
Mr. Babcock said it was evident that the
bill was completely misunderstood. The
gas company was not insistent for
thority to consolidate with the electric
companies, and would agree to eliminate
that provision
Mr.. Hepburn said that If there had been
any fair opportunity for the citizens to
become familiar with the bill he had no
doubt there would have been opposition
to 1t.
The Assertion Misleading.
Mr.. Babcock said Mr.. Hepburns asser-
tion was entirely misleading. The bill had
been published in the Washington papers
and no one had appeared In opposition TO
1t.
Mr.. Hepburn said that every dollar OF
betterments and increases enjoyed by this
company had been secured out of the earn
ings of the company. It may be that there
Is no objection to the bill on the part of the
citizens. and that they are content with 1t.
but he doubted.
..Why." said Mr.. Moody. "here is re-
port OF the Commissioners objecting to this
stock-jobbing scheme"
Mr. Babcock challenged him to produce
the evidence. Mr.. Babcock said that Il