The Roswell daily record. [volume] (Roswell, N.M.) 1903-current, 1907-07-18


the taxpayer. for he must pay the In
terest thereon as well as the cost Of
maintenance. But in the case of the
three public utilities here considered,
it has been thoroughly demonstrated
that the interest and fixed charges
are paid by users or consumers and
that in no instance has the taxpayer
been called Upon to make I'D any de
icieacy. except possibly temporarily
and then he IA been repaid at a later
time.
But this is not all. It has been de-
ffnitely shown not only hat the debt
is not a burden upon the taxpayer,
but that the taxpayer gets financial
benefit from municipal operation, and
therefore from the time the very debt
which is claimed to be a burden upon
him. 1t is not evidence, but it is sug-
gestive, that the local rates (tax rates)
were lower for every group of towns
when there was municipal operation
of gas, electricity or trans than where
companies were operating.
Review of Mr.. Edgar and Mr.. Clark.
British Gas Service.
Mr.. Edgar and Mr.. Clark open their
comments on the British gas situation
by pointing Il hat the private COM
panies supply gas at lower prices than
do the municipalities. Thus, the rela-
lively small cities of Newcastle and
Sheffield get cheaper gas from private
companies than do the larger cities
of Manchester, Birmingham or Glas-
gov. The difference in cost per ton
of coal does not explain this difference
in the selling price of gas. according
to the reviewers, who find that the
greater efficiency in management and
in energy in selling the b~y-products
has much to do with the lower prices.
The service given by the cities, altno
1T is pointed out that the investigation
of the candle power of the light sup
piled was incomplete in the municipal
plants because of the declination of
the authorities to permit the experts
to make full examination.
The whole question of the quality
of the product of the municipalities
Is in doubt" say the reviewers. 'Tne
members of the Commission and the
experts who are familiar with gas and
photometry see no escape from the con
clusion that the above municipalities
are unwilling to have the actual quail
ity of their service determined by in
dependent and competent authorities,
and that the gas supplied by private
companies is much superior in candle
power to that supplied by municipal
tiles.
THE apparent Indifference to illum-
mating value on the part of the NUM-
cipalities is the more remarkable
when we consider the relatively small
additional cost of an added candle
power. Their failure to make the best
reasonably possible gas for their con-
sumers is consistent with their failure
to give their the facilities
and attention that are afforded by the
companies. We are not discussing
questions of candle power versus price
1t is no part of our duty to determine
a company or municipality is
wise to lower the Illuminating value
of its product, that it may sell at a
lower price"
Financial.
Considering the general gas service
from a financial standpoint and with
a view also to the character of SER
given and the maintenance of
Mr.. Edgar and Mr.. Clark de-
clare in favor of the private compaa-
les. They find that apparently the CT
tizens of municipalities operating gas
plants are not seriously concerned
with the operation; do 1ot regard the
operation of the gas plant as a matter
OF general interest, and do not take
interest in it which is advanced
as n of the arguments in favor of
municipal ownership and operation.
The lack of interest in municipal
plants indicates a general Indifference
IN the part of the public to a condi-
ton that they tolerate because they
not how to remedy.
"On a superficial view" continue
the reviewers, the fact that munich
pal undertakings contribute some of
earnings to the city treasury,
and thus aid in reducing the tax rate,
seems an advantage gained by That
method of operation. Leaving aside
the question of injustice involved by
Il system of relieving the taxpayer
at the expense of the gas consumer,
let us examine, III the municipal
plants investigated. what would have
the effect if the companies pric-
mad prevailed.
Glasgow cannot enter into this com
parison, because that city has been
for many years., prohibited by Act of
Parliament from applying any of the
profits from its gas undertaking to h
common good. London is omitted be-
cause OF It's widely different condi-
Continued on Page Four