The Washington times., 1909-03-29
EXPERTS EVIDENCE
HITS GAS NONOPOL
Says System of Purifcation
of Both Companies Is
Insufficient.
Continued from First Page)

respect to the Washington Gas Light
Company.
Mr.. Adams then declared it to be his
opinion that the construction Of the
publication plant of the Washington
Gas Light Company was not such as
to make it comply with the provisions
OF the law of the District of Columbia
with respect to the purity of gas.
Defense Objects.
r. Ross Perry, chief counsel for the
defense Immediately objected 10 the
witnesses answer, stating that it tended
to impute bad motives upon the part
OF the constructors of the plant. Chief
Justice CIabaugh upheld the objection.
My answer said Adams, did not
properly convey the meaning that 1 in
tended ii should. Il was my Intention
to show that the construction of the
plant was not adapted 70 absolutely
freeing gas from its impurities, and 1
don't think il was"
This answer of Adams was allowed 10
stand.
Following Up the damaging admission
Dy the witness concerning the alleged
inferior publication plant of the Wash
lnGton Gas Light Company. Attorney
stevens pressed the witness TO give his
reasons Tor the statement. These daalt
principally with testimony regarding the
Use Of lime and iron oxide by the de-
fendant company for purifcation pur-
poses.
Gives Reason.
I don't think the lime and iron OK
ide used by the Washington Gas Light
Company enabled the company TO know
whether the purity process entirely eli n
mated sulphureted hydrogen from gas. -
said Adams.
The witness. in testifying a few mo-
ments later 10 the publication system
employed by the Georgetown Gas Light
Company, said that as this company
used only two purifiers he believed the
system was such as to prevent them
from definitely ascertaining whether the
gas was free from Sulphureted hydro
gen or from any or the sulphur COp-
pound above the limit allowed by Law.
Adams stated that ne understood from
the testimony that the last purifier
through which the gas passes Indicated
impurities and apparently there is no
way OF aScertaining just how much Of
these impuri les the last purifier elm
mated
Disrnantling Process.
In speaking of the dismanuing pro
cess of certain purifiers. which formed
an important part in the testimony
- =
of the case, Adams said that in his
opinion the company should have in
stalled a new set OF purifiers before
repairing or putting out OF commission
any Of the Old ones. This. he said.
would have made the publication OF the
gas much safer lie said that while II
is practical to install purifiers one at 4
time, il is a much better plan To put in
an entire system Of new purifiers at the
same time rather than pieCemeal.
Gas Inspector Runyan occupied the
witness stand the greater part of the
morning and was put through a grueI-
ing examination by Attorney
Perry. In the attempt 70 strengthen
the side OF the defense with respect to
the contention that the average Of
tests Is the only WY to ascertain
candlepoweT. Attorney Perry asked
Runyan several questions regarding an
alleged conversation the witness had
had with certain officials Of the gas
company on this subject.
The import OF tie question was to
show that Runyan had indicated TO the
officials that he haC been advised by
Corporation Counsel Thomas TO follow
he practice Of mo predecessors in Of
fee, which was that OF making an av-
crage number Of tests Runyan how
ever. in response to the several Olies-
tiOns. insisted that he did not remem-
Der having ever had any conversation
such as was suggested by the attorney
for the defense.