Graham guardian., 1921-05-20

| tHGS WCiC IuS olliJ OiiSo ooeo'iloOtN W.
cause of the financial condition of the
company, and the further fact that at
that time the peak load they had to
bear, that. Is the greatest load they
would carry at any time, day or night,
was not as great rs is now the ordinary
day load, we will see that the criticisms
made are not founded on real merit.
But be that as it may, if the engines
will not do the work, engines must be
secured that will do it. In any event,
it will be necessary to add another unit
to the plant to secure continuous serv-
ice that is satisfactory. We direct
your attention to these facts. because
i they should be known and understood.
What these improvements will cost we
do not attempt to estimate. They will.
of course, depend on the extent of the
improvement. But the cost will be
spread over considerable length of
time, aud we believe that by careful
businesslike management the plant
will pay a considerable part of the cost.
What we wish TO show you is the
COST of the entire plant to date, its
VALUE as determined by the records
and fixed by the Corporation Commits
sion. and finally to suggest some meth
DDS whereby it can be saved to the
town.
Few people realize the cost of a
public utility. No doubt you have heard
many expressions of opinion by persons
who, if they knew all they told, would
be big consulting engineers for great
construction projects. What we are
stating to you is taken from the records
of the company, and these records are
open to your inspection. The water
plant has cost to date of December 81,
1920. the sum of 500. $3.50. We have
n accurate data as to the cost of the
light plant, but on that date it was re-
turned to the Corporation Commission
with a value of S52, 77l.Sl, less de-
probation. Hence, its cost would have
been considerable more. On that date
the physical valuation of the plant was
returned at $l78, ,0l091. from which
was deducted depreciation of s43,-
454. Sc, leaving net physical valuation
of $l34, 556.36. These are not puffer's
figures or inflated values placed for the
purposes of sale, but are figures care
fully scrutinized by the accountants Of
the Corporation Commission and must
be supported by the books and accounts
of the company. At the present high
price of pipe supplies, of machinery,
and distribution supplies, wire and
other commodities, THIS PLANT
CANNOT BE REPLACED SHORT
OF One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dol
lars. Will some of our self-appointed,
consulting engineers figure it out?
No doubt considerable money has
been spent in experimentation that
gave little result. Possibly some spent
foolishly. Perhaps great deal of
money has been raised which went into
organization cost. promoters profits,
and other costs that added nothing to
the value of the plant. But these
figures are the cost that has actually
gone into the plant anl ad led to its
ualue.
Let us next consider the cost of op-
GRAFTON and the revenue derived from
the plant during the past twelve months.
We do not attempt to go back of that
date, but the records are open to any
one who wishes to do so. During the
eight months from April, 1920, to No
'vember, 1920, the total cost of opera
ton was SD, l74.35 and the revenue
$40. 5l3.49, leaving a profit of Sc, 339. Ia.
Under the present receiver, the last
four months, from December, 1920. to
March, 1921, inclusive. shows total
cost of operation of &c. 903.0l and
total revenue of $ll, ,l48.O2, leaving a
profit balance of 81. 245 OIL. or nearly
81, 100 per month. We give you these
figures for the purpose Of showing you
that the concern is under careful man
agement can be made to pay good
return on the investment required to
keep it in operation. The exp .nditures
during the first ght months of 1920
show many items which might possibly
have been avoided possibly some items
not part of legitimate expense of op-
GRAFTON. With these matters and with
the question of where the money has
gone. we are not concerned. That is
past and done. The months under the
receiver have been exceptionally heavy
months. Litigation, necessarily added
equipment, and other unusual contin-
gencies have added to the cost. But
the receivership has demonstrated be-
yond doubt that the concern can be
made to pay. 1t is not a "Get-Rich-
Quick Wallingford" scheme, but is
proposition that with careful manage
ment and cooperation. should yield
good, safe return on the investment.
With the foregoing statements in
mind, we offer the following suggestions
as TO the disposal of the property:
First, we believe the TOWN
SHOULD OWN THE PLANT. We
do not make this statement for the
purpose of boosting bond issue or of
attempting to persuade the taxDavers
to incur debt which the future must
pay. For bonds are like notes, there
comes a due date upon them,. md in