The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-05-23

pany franchise ordinance with some
slight amendments. which the friends
of the ordinance did not seriously op-
pose.
Mr.. Keller led a fight for the inser-
ton of provisions limiting the life Of
the franchise to forty years, and fixing
| eighty-flve cents on. the maximum
price to be charged for gas, but the
highest number of votes he could mus
ter to his support was seven.
| The ayes and nays were called OH the
amendment providing that the fran
chise and the gas plant should become
the property of the city at the end of
forty years. The vote was as follows:
| Ayes-NIessrs. Snowden. T.. A. Evans.
Paine, Knoepfel. Sykes, Fuller Keller-7.
| Nays-Messrs. Clarke, j. j. Evans, Da-
| vid Evans, Casterline, Henry, Haggerty,
Soaring, A. l.. Lewis. James. Calpin, Nc
| Greevy, Ruane, Roche, Calvin, Gurrell.
| William Lewis. Graf. j. G.. Rosar. Troy,
| Cusick, Barrett, Norton. Robathan-2j.
| When the ordinance came from the
| light and water committee 1T had at
| tached to it amendments providing that
the company shall indemnify the city
| for damages to pavements from laying
pipes or from leakages; that free gas
shall be furnished city buildings. police
stations, fire houses and the like, on
| the line OF any street, avenue, court,
place or lane where the company's lines
| extend; that the company shall pay in
and after the year 1895 tax of two
| per cent of it's gross receipts; that the
company shall, within two years, have
in operation a plant capable of supply
ing one thousand consumers. and,
within seven years, n plant capable OF
| supplying 5000 consumers.
WERE ALL ADOPTED.
These amendments We're all adopted
as was also one proposed by Mr.. Kel-
Ter which works forfeiture of the
| franchise if the company sells out to
or conSolidates with competing conf
pany.
| The Keller amendments which We're
defeated provoked lengthy and spir-
| tied discussion, in which some rather
tart things were said. Mr.. Keller OPEN
ly declared that the Consumers COM
pany was nothing more or less than
| pinch concern, and wanted the fran
| chise solely for the purpose Of selling
| it. The fact that councils are asked
| to grant the company a franchise with
out being able to ascertain who COM
pose the company, is, of itself, Mr.. Kel-
| Ter said, sufficient to show that it was
| open to suspicion.
Mr.. Gurrell who led the fight for the
franchise and Mr.. Calpin, Mr.. Graf and
| Mr.. Calvin who seconded him, declared
| with quite the same freedom charac-
| terizing Mr.. Keller's remarks, that
| those who opposed the ordinance did
so because Of a desire to prevent the
Scranton Gas and Water company from
having competition.
| Mr.. Keller laid particular stress on
| the fact that the personnel of the COM
pany was not disclosed even to the
councilmen.
"Who is the Consumers Gas COM
pany, anyway" he asked. at is due
to the city to know who these men are.
This ordinance is the same as the one
vetoed by the recorder last year. You
know how the press charged crooked
ness in the passage of that ordinance.
I know of solid business men who with
drew from the company because of
crookedness in the passage OF the
franchise. They told me so, them
selves. I'm not saying there was any
thing crooked or that there is any
thing crooked now, but I'm telling you
that men told me they withdrew from
the company because of their belief
that there was crooked work done in
connection with the passage of the Or
dinanec. The papers charged that
councilmen We're bought up. II you
want to avoid repetition of that
charge give the public the names OF
the men who are behind this company.
Give us the names of the officers at
least.
SHOULD LIMIT FRANCHISE.
Continuing Mr.. Keller declared the
council could give the citizens no ac-
ceptable reason for voting down the
amendments limiting the price of gas.
and the life of the franchise. Gas, he
averred, could be made for SIS cents at
a profit, and no progressive city is now
giving perpetual franchises. "lf the
city had acted wisely in the beginning"
he said, 1--WE would now own the Scran-
ton Railway company.
Mr.. Graf could not see the Justice of
imposing on the new company burdens
out of all proportion to those borne by
the old company. An attempt to do
this was, to his mind nothing less than
an attempt to stife competition.
After declaring that he had voted
against the last ordinance, Mr.. Calpln
explained that he favored this one be-
cause 1t imposed a tax on the COM
pany's gross receipts, 1t might be that
it was only a nominal tax, he said, but
it was something, and no matter how
small, it is more than the city ever got
before. He believed in encouraging
competition and that in this instance
competition was badly needed.
"Why do we need it?" interrupted
Mr.. Keller.
"Because, If it is true as you say,
that gas can be made for eighty-five
cents at profit, the new company will
effect a reduction of the present rate
of dollar"
"But it wont do It," rejoined Mr..
Keller at will never build plant"
Messrs. Gurrell and Calvin made
speeches in favor OF competition. Mr..
Paine told that he Is getting gas as
fuel for eighty cents and believed in
effecting If possible a cheapening of
gas for illuminating purposes. He
would not vote for the ordinance,
though, because the tax was too small.
He wanted that it should be five per
cent. He also looked with disfavor on
the ordinance because the identity of
the company Is not disclosed. AS far
as he knew, he declared it might be the
old company looking for a new fran
chise.
Mr.. Gurrell here asked Mr. Paine If |