The daily Alaskan., 1921-02-12

IAamine the facts as presented. Notice the Home Power co, in cludes the 10 big Broadway light' of 500 W. each when these lights have no connection with the mat fer at issue. They reprd5ent-a con tract between the merchants and the Home Power Co. in which q former Council helped out by pay lng $1O q month for light current These wsre for display lights only.
 -Last year tha Cornell pil S1S5 for current for these lights. Sub tract from $144S and you hav' s1S13 paid last year for 7$-6O w lamps. Home Power Co. charges against this $545 for Int. and up keep or S76S net or 5.S cents per Xiv. not 3:S-5 cents Per XIV. But the Home Power Co. knows that s2ooo is an exorbitant charge for l3ns and poles most of which Is al- so used for house lighting etc. 5000 Is liberal. Its books will aIso shcw that the linem2n employ ed by the Home Power Co. more the1. makes his salary in repairs Tor flight users. So that upkeep of line instead of costing Home Power Co ABOUT $1.OO day costs not more tnen 40 cents q day for upkeep o' $146.OO a year, plus $S0 interest is $226. Council offered for 7S-6O W. lights $102O.OO a year. This snm minus int. and upkeep t$226) Is net s794.OO or 3 cents Per Xiv. Not far from Councils 6 cent state mert.
 Home Power Co says all light an P. y.r companies give rates to "larg consumers'' of heat and power. Wh does it leave out light? Is Xiv. heat User a Large Consumer? yet more than one gets a 2 cent Xiv. rate in Skagway. Certainly the Town or company using $1oOO.Oo of lights would not be called small user in a town of this size. The town is therefore, by the Home Power Go. s admissions, entitled to a sp.cial rate.
 I. Home Power Co. had these fig urss why did 1t never present them to the Council or Councils Commit tea?
 It also statss that if the Town i, unable to pay it would be pleased to give lights for several months free. The Taxpayers representa- ttves are not asking the Company fo' Charity; they are merely asking for square deal on the light Ques- tion.
 In another paragraph the Compan says on Friday Feb. 4th the light ouesnon WAS SETTLED ON A FAVORABLE COMPROMISE, b. tween the Company and one council mat and the Mayor, and the light. ws,e turned on. There Is no qCes- tion that CouncilS Select committee acted exactly as 1t was instructed to act by the unanimous vote c tho Council, after full and care fu1 consideration. The Committee 'had no other alternative. It had trIed and tried to get some settle- laent put could not. If the Home Power Co. Mad a counter offer to make, why did it not put it in writ ing and hand it to the Select Com mittee, asking that it be consid- cred at the coming Council meet .ins, and in the meantime lights on pending settlement? Isstead ( taking this, the businesslike cou75s; it ignores the Committee and charg- es "preiudtce'. In the interest o fairness we ask, twas not the Com uany, even if unintentionally so; do ing an tnjuetice?'
 Further, was the Company justi- fled, when the Council asked for meter in the interest of economy, to State to Council that the COmpa- ny would so arrange it that Coun- cil would have to pay as much by meter as on the old flat rate? Was 1t far to put 8 minimum of $50 Per