The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-05-12
GLASGOW AGAIN URGES
CITY CHARTER CHANGE
II That BE Done Gas Lease Not Nee.
essary, But Success Impossible
Now.
OUR SYSTEM Is INEFFICIENT
Utilize Gas Question As Part of the
Broader Issue to Help Citizens
Realize Necessity for Complete
Change.

Emphasizing again his belief that
present system OF municipal govern
ment of Richmond is inefficient. and
tnat there should be a. complete
cnange in the government of our
city" Arthur Glasgow. of London,
England, addressed the Rotary Club
members last night.
Mr. Glasgow took occasion tn ex-
plain more fully his views on the
proposal to lease the gas plant. In
pTef, they are that public ownership
OF such things as are not public utili-
ICES IL, as rule. undesirable. but as
Richmond already owns her gas works
sincere attempt to make II success
fui should be made. IF we care
enough for good government to amend
our charter and constitution and
establish an efficient permanent or
sanization OF experts to administer
our city, there is then no reason to
lease our gas supply" he said.
Mr.. Glasgow was heard with con.
siderable attention by members of the
Rotary Club and guests, and his re-
marks, on the whole. met with APP
uproval on the part of his audience
Mr. Glasgow's Speech.
In beginning his talk last night to
the Rotary Club. Arthur Glasgow
said:
Il was highly gratifed by the cor
dial endorsement which all Of our pa
pers gave to the suggestions l made
last week to the Business Mems Club.
But, In one respect. l evidently failed
to express myself clearly, and | shall
take this opportunity to set myself
straight
Under the head line, Noted Elk
pert Against Transfer of Control of
Plant to Private Hands, I am report
ed to have said: 1 am opposed to leas-
ing the Gas Works to a private cor
poration, and the transfer of a dis
unctly municipal enterprise to the
control of an outside organization
| his to not MY view. I am OPP
posed, at the present juncture. to o
lease of the Gas Works; but not, in
the least, for the reason above sug-
gested.
Let me quote from my statement to
the Administrative Board. dated Mo-
vember s. 1913, recently published In
the newspaper:
Officially, there Is some doubt IL
municipality is rSght In underta king
the gas supply. j should be inclined
to say No" except for the fact that
the gas service requires the use of the
public streets ~he reason should
say mo" La, In the first place, be-
cause gas is not a public necessity
llike water and sewage), but a COM
petEtive business. subject to all tho
vicissitudes OF competition, including
obsolescence: and. secondly, because
you pledge the financial credit Of
the people to an enterprise which
serves only q portion of the people,
Ethical Questions Involved.
In the case III health. fire. police.
water and sewage the welfare of the
whole community Is at stake. 1t liz
just as essential u me that my neigh
Dor should enjoy an adequate water
supply and keep his closets properly
flushed. as that should do SO. His
health and fire protection is as i'm
portant TO me as my own. But 1t does
not concern me. In the least. whether
he uses gas, electricity, lamps or
candles, or goes to bed at dark. /
have. therefore, n very good case, an
deed, when decline to engage In the
business of supplying him with any
of these optional conveniences. and
refer him to properly regulated pri-
waite enterprise.
80 much for the ethical side of
municipal trading. In this country,
where the inef1iciency of municipal ad-
mlnistration il a by-word, the prac-
teal side is far less encouraging; In
Therefore, at the present time. I
am absolutely opposed to american
cities undertaking gas. electricity or
traction services.
Dangerous and Humiliating.
1T is time enough to consider such
businesses, when we have demonstrat-
ed our capacity TO administer the
fundamental public necessities, such
as water, fire and police-services
which are dang srous and humiliating
in Richmond today.
! But the Richmond gas supply now
presents special issue. involving not
only our good name. but the broadest
welfare of our community.
I'VE already own the Gas
| Works, and have owned them for
nearly sixty-five years; but we
have never really tried to run
them. After all this period OF
ownership, shall We not give them
q trial, before parting with them?
o., ~Hxuyl x~.r, sSs,.p fs.au sasnFurstvsSa Ara.