The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-11-28
SAYS GAS ISSUE
MUST Be MET NOW
Alderman Mitchell Defends Pro-
posed Reduction TO so Cents
4 Thousand.
NOT "A CAMPAIGN MEASURE
Declares He Is Not Surprised at
Being Charged With Play
ing Politics.
NOT "A CAMPAIGN MEASURE

| The cheaper gas issue cannot lie
sidetracked and we may as we'll face
1T now as at any other time" said
Alderman j. j. Mitchell. Of Clay Ward,
yesterday. The operation of the Gas
Works at an enormous profit was never
contemplated by the city. and is moth
ing more than class legislation in favor
Of the citizenship at large at tho cx-
| users
IL, as we'll as the other members OF
the Public Utilities subcommittee that
submitted n report i'm favor of SO-ccnt
gas. have been charged with doing
so for campaign purposes. Such Il
! charGc. prepostcrouS nS IL is, was not
| uncNpected To recommend any gen
eral reduction in the price OF a NUM-
! cipally manufactured commodity is to
Invite just such criticism
Committee Concurs.
Tue subcommittee referred to by Mr.
Mitchell was composed of Alderman
Joseph IL. Powers. chairman. Council
man Gilbert X. Pollock and Alderman
Mitchell II was appointed several
months ago under a Council rcsolu-
u"n authorizing an inquiry into the
gas cost problem, and reported after
an exhaustive investigation in favor
or reduction TO SO cents Mr.. Pol
rock alone. OF tho subcommittee de-
| clincd 10 sign the report
The Committee on Public Buildings
Properties ana Utilities concurrod I'm
/. inc report OF its subcommittee by a
vote of TO . The negative vo,as wcrc
cast by Councilman Pollard ana POL
lock
The recommendation Is now on tho
docket OF the Board OF Aldermen and
VIII come up before It nt the noxt
meeting, on December 49,
Mr. Mitchell was or tho opinion v.s-
/ terday that with the facts and figures
before 1t, the Board will approve the
I proposed reduction. He appeared con
. stdcrably exercised that his motivns I'm
! taking n decided stand Tor th, ycdur-
. ZION should be called into question.
Not for Pront-NInIsing
IN" Richmond city Gas Works was
not established for making" said
| MI. Mitchell. defending the proposed
/ reduction. up to n few years AFRO INC
city ordinance provided that the price
OF gas TO Tho consumers should DO
| based upon the actual cost OF produc-
/ disbursements for expenses and
/ interest on $1,000 600 valuation of the
/ plant u this rule were applied now
, we would sell gas for less Than 80
/ cents thousand.
Let Us look at the arbitrary charges
now added 10 the cost Of production
/ charges which many people believe AFRO
used to hide The profits OF The Gas
=
and Treasurcrs offices $500; office
rent. $1,000; part OF the City Attor-
ncS ) salary. $500 These charges are
not Levied against iho Water Depart
nent Then why are they charged
against the Gas Department"
S2.OO0.nOO In Profits
Take tho charge OF SG3.5oS.31 for
interest and rcdtmption iutcrcs, on
what Does the Gas Works owe Inc
city "nything? On tho contrary. after
/ deductinS all Disbursements on account
( or Gas Works for all purposes ana
, paying tho city interest on these dig
/ bursemcntS. tho plant h.ts 10 its credit
! in accumulated profits more than s.
1 100000. which. II It had been laid aside
FOR that purpose. would ho more than
enough 10 ray for All the improve
ments III" works viii need in the next
forty years
y can lind nothing In the city ordi-
nances authorizing the SGl.25o charge
! against the Gas Works for taxes on the
>3.50e,toO valuation No tax OF this
Kind Is charged against any other de-
partmeut and no taxes are assessed on
the valuation OF other city property.
THIS is another one OF those charges
/ that help 10 hide the profit.
} Il md another charge OF Sl9,iiS.3S
to pay the contractor for furnishing,
lighting and keeping the street lamps
( in repair. These lamps arc for the
benefit Of the city 1T large, yet their
maintenance is charged To gas consun-
crs alone. We might with equal Justice
to tho Gas Works. The cost OF street
cleaning ana other public benefits
might also be made an element In the
cost OF manufacturing gas
Zig Profit nj so Cents.
The report OF Superintendent
Knowles for last year shows that after
dcductin; tho usual charges from re-
CENTS we had Il profit Of SECS, 4S4.GS.
Even after deducting tho charges /
have iGSt enumerated. and which con-
slider unjust. there Was sim q profit Of
$142.S G3 At SO cents thousand the gas
receipts for last year would have been
about $4,000 less. Add TO this the in
creased cost OF oil--about sea. O00--and
We have "a total loss OF $4,000 TO he
deducted on the basis Of the receipts
for 1872 This would still leave Il net
profit OF S30.S03 6S
once we deduct the unfair charges
have mentioned. the profits grow
large. am prepared TO show that the
Gas Works Will show "a real profit OF
100000 or more the first year OF its
operation under an S0-ccnt rate.
Duty to Give Reduction.
"it is our duty TO furnish this great
necessity to our people as chcaply as
possible. 1t is unfair. unjust and class
lcgislat ton to take from the gas con-
sumcrs any more than Is actually need
ed 10 give proper service. The gas
consumer should not he required to pay
Tor benefits enjoyed by nonconsumers.
The reduction asked for is not un-
reasonable. 1t still leaves the works
on "a oiit-paying basis. with splendid
prospects for tho future. We are not
asking for tho whole loaf. but for less
than half of II. The rich have no right
10 expect tho gas consumers of limited
means TO pay into tho city treasury
revenue. which should be derived from
taxes"