The Plymouth tribune. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1901-1911, 1907-07-04
Electric Light Ownership.


permost in the minds of those citi-
zens who take part in such matters,
and several having expressed an
opinion through your columns | de-
sire space for word on this matter
so closely concerning us all. My
first question is one that has been
asked through your paper before,
viz: if a private individual can do
well by operating this public enter
prise, why cannot the public through
its agents, the councilmen, do like
wise, or ar any rate save much of
the present expense. / asked exper-
fenced engineers if the water works
plant and lighting plant could not be
combined, and operated by one set
of machinery and men at aaminimum
cost, and they say it can and one fire
made to operate both plants. We are
paying Mr.. Snoeberger at this time
$40 per street light and there is about
fifty of them, or about $500 per
month for street lights alone, besides
the incandescent lights over the city.
However, let me say right here that
there is no fight whatever against
Mr.. Snoeberger personally, but
against the city council granting him
the franchise he desires. The city
council seems to have gone crazy
and though they are simply the city's
chosen mediators, they seem to have
lost sight of the fact entirely and TO
have concluded they are the city it
self, body and breeches, or to have
concluded to say like one G. Cleve-
land-"the public be damned" In a
conversation with one of the council
men at large Thursday he tried to
explain to me that for the city to OPP
crate its own plant was an uphill
matter, because it was practically an
impossibility to find a competent,
worthy man for the place; that to
run the lighting plant would require
an experienced electrician or have
some inexperienced man. burn out a
dynamo occasionally, worth five or
six hundred dollars Well the plant
has been running fifteen years or
more and up to date no dynamos
have been burned out, besides that
$500 per year for street lights would
replace several burned out dynamos
and pay an electrician besides. He
said they had received letters from
several cities admonishing them not
to take control of the lighting plant
|f they wanted any peace of mind
during the balance of their term OF
office. Well | can assure them they
will get a piece of several good citi-
zens' mind if they don't take control
of the lighting plant, or give " at
least fair chance in the franc lise
granted. besides / believe a man that
will stand up and say no. honest man
can be found to run such a plant
needs watching himself or to be tap
ped for the simples, or both.
In reply to the question why they
were hurrying this franchise along
now when the present franchise runs
to Feb. 16, 1910 he said, some Chi
cago parties want day current.
There is point on which | hail from
Missouri. We make bold to say thu
man who wrote that letter die il al
the instigation of interested parties
| for a purpose. Why any newspaper
will defend the action of the council
at this time seems strange, but is &c
a surprise. Now my fellow cisi1en.
in closing, | desire to admonish yol
10 bestir yourselves to Go what yol
can to- thwart the present intention:
of the majority of the council. anC
save our city thousands of dc,lar.
in taxation in the 10 years in advance
Remember we have neighborini
cities that are paying $50 PEI ligh
while we pay $40 and other like ecu
nomical points can be reserved tC
ourselves if we but take hold arigh
of the matter now before us. Who
to-day would sanction the sale of on
water works, that is not only payins
its own way put making money 70
the city. Then why not the city owl
lall its own plants and couple tbi
two together for running, that ex
lpenses may be reduced to the min,
mum and the city reap a revenu,
from both. This is not all on paper
but facts that are deduced by a littl
common sense reasoning. Don't sc
back until it is too late and then kicl
but let us put our shoulders/to tn,
wheel and all push together for tn,
best interests of our city.
Citizen.