Omaha daily bee., 1903-02-27
LIGHT PLANT FOR CITIES
Victor Rosewa er Submits Paper FavOring
Pubic Ownership.
LIEUTENANT cAHOos OPPOSES PLAN
enestion u Taken Up and Discussed
st some Length by Convention
on Municipal QlyRership and
Public nership.


NEW YORK, Feb 2s.-The second days
session Of the National Convention on
Municipal Ownership and Public Fran
ehises began today With a discussion on
Municipal Ownership n Electric Lighting
Plants"
The Affirmative was taken by Victor
Rosewater, editor Of The Omaha Daily Bee
and the negative by Lieutenant Cahoon
secretary OF the National Electric Light
association.
In Mr.. Rosewater's paper the futility OF
competition as a regulative force to re-
press the inevitable tendency Of monopoly
In electric lighting and TO prevent extor-
tionate charges was clearly pointed out.
From statistics complied by the commits
sioner of labor for the federal government
he showed that the financial saving result
ing from municipal ownership was sub
stantial and verified by the experience Of
many American cities. While admitting
that the statistics at hand ate not all that
10 desired, the superiority of the muni-
oipally owned plants over the private cor
pofations In the matter Of cheap and effi-
otent service, both to the pbblc and TO
private consumers Of electric lighting, is.
supported by all the facts hnd figures.
AS to the contention that m1hicipal own
ership would drag the electric lighting
service into politics. he asked how the sub
jeot could be dragged further into politics
than It now is under the system Of private
franchise grants. In all the disclosures
OF municipal corruption in various cities
throughout the country during the last
few years the most Migrant cases Of bribe-
giving have arisen out of attempts to pur-
chase franchises from venal public on
clals, while no important example OF dis
honesty has been uncovered In any munich
pal lighting plant once Installed. The
question is no longer between municipal
ownership and competitive private enter
prise, but between municipal ownership
and municipal control; but the best terms
enforcible under municipal control are less
effective and less satisfactory than under
municipal ownership.
Mr.. Cahoon said in part:
Experience of Chicago.
Each community or municipality may do
as u seems best IN the matter OF lighting
It's streets; may either enter upon the busi-
ness itself or contract with private corpo-
ration to furnish It with the necessary
country. still continue to let out the con-
tracts for this work 10 private corpora
tons, and on the whole this had worked
The big plant in Chicago is only doing
about IL per cent better than the average
when we might fairly look for 30 per cent.
= In other words, II by operating a big plant
lamps l. Il cannot show aBsste BstteT eSonS%y CO SE
than ~ per cent over the average country
plant ,bs, va the S,s same ns state we may fSr as
4 saving TO the city by operating it's own
II we municipalize electric light plants we
take. away the Incentive to progress to.
ward q oheaper method Of production and
Is %s ~ 5hs se pca tbs Ssps 5O
paiiues have started into any such enter
prise, 80 far as they were concerned prog
Electricity is by no means fully developed
sandsth only. way to make further improye-
manufacturers IL improve apparatus.
Experimeats Are Expensive.
Today the old electric light companies
are heavily capitaized. not from injecting
water into their securities but from the
fact that they have paid the usual penalty
prices for the original apparatus. In a
short time this had to be replaced by q
better grade and this, in turn. has had to
be replaced by modern apparatus. What
profits were made were promptly paid out
IN dlvidends, and nothing was set aside for
the replacement of apparatus. Depreciation
was never thought Of. hence the burden
on the electric light plant is much heavier
than on amy other form OF manufacturing
plant.
= We dc not, want TO. stop progress in the
electrical fields aud fall behind the world
which We are now leading. We want, on
the other hand, to progress and to DO
every thing possible to reach the maximum
OF economy in production and diBtit5a.!on
Of electricity, so that its price may be
reduced 10 point where even the Smallest
storekeeper and the poorest family can
AFFORD TO use IL. Such a result can be ac-
complished only by leaving this In the
hands OF private companies and by the
municipality helping the electric light plant
In every way possible.
Question IL One of Cost.
think the great trend of all arguments
on the municipal ownership question I'm the
past has been along the lines as TO whether
the municipal plant can be operated so as
10 furnish lights for city at a less cost
than the existing company can furnish
thema l say frankly that the municipal
plant cannot furnish light at as low "a
cost, all things considered the city can
obtain from the local private company.
The day of secrecy in the matter OF ac-
counting by electric light companies has
gone by and there Is not single modern.
up-to-date plant in the United States which
Is not ready and willing to show the
municipality just what IL costs TO furnish
them street lights
Here II a comparatively new industry In
process of development. Do the people OF
the United States want to encourage II or
throttle it7 / believe that when people
come 20 look upon i In this light the
Z favor OF helping the Industry in every rea-
4 sonable way. II l am right In my belief
then the question Of municipal ownership
of electric light plants disappears.
The discussion which followed was par.
tleipated in by Edward e. Elliott. city cleo