The Connecticut labor news., 1921-03-04
GAS CO.'S METER CHARGE
(Continued from First Page.)

(Continued from First Page.) sion had refused to interfere until its decision adverse to the interests of the Meriden Gas Company, which, he al legged, was due to the fact that three bills relating to service charges were pending in the General Assembly. Sen ator Challenger and Hugh J. Laverty of Bridgeport, denounced the practice i'll their city where, 1t was alleged, the gas company was reaping approximate 1y $200,0O0 in annual income from gas $2 a year. The overwhelming percent age of this meter charge revenue, they alleged, came from small consumers at the rate of 50 cents a month.
 Alderman Raphael of Hartford told the committee he represented the sen timent of the board or aldermen and the gas consumers of the city in op- posing the service charges. He said there was no objection to the gas rates, but that the service charge was consid- cred unjust and unreasonable. Repre- sentative Veitch of Manchester, Cor poration Counsel Fiske of Rockville, Corporation Counsel Davis of Danbury and Professor Borchard of Yale, who drew the bill, also spoke in favor of the bill. Mr. Borchard declared that he believed in private ownership of public utilities, but that unless the utilities corporations changed their methods the people would change the situation at the polls. He said that the public utility corporations should treat everybody alike without discrimination.
 The purpose of the service charge, according to MT. Borchard, was to get rid of the small consumer, although the small consumer was i'll the great major ity and made 1t possible for the corpora tions to get their franchises. He said that the bill provided for liberal mini mum charge.
 At the second hearing further at tacks on the gas company were made before the company officials could get their innings. Charles Gay of New Haven denounced the charge as "out- rageous and robbery" which nettled President Nettleton of the New Haven Gas Company to reply: By that l suppose he means that the officers of the New Haven Gas Light Co. are thieves" "I do, but you don't know it," snapped back MT. Gay and the commit tee interfered.
 The gas companies had, of course, a great array of legal talent present to put their side of the case, although MT. Nettleton led the way with a blunt statement that a new flat rate for gas instead of the meter charge would fol- low because big consumers would use oher fuels and that would mean a high CT rate to the small consumer. He and number of other gas company officials ard lawyers denied that the meter charge is unfair and pleaded with the committee not to rob the utilities com mission of its powers to determine rates of public service corporations as would be done if such restrictive legislation was adopted.
 Attorney George L. Watrous for the New Haven company attacked the pro- posed legislation for the following reasons:
 l. That the bills should be rejected and the matter of rate regulation should be left to the public utilities commits sion, which he characterized as flair body of men,"
 2. That the service or meter charge is just and equitable.
 3. That the proposed legislation would destroy the rate structures built up by electric light companies and these com panies based their rates on a service charge basis.
 4. That the small consumer for whom the protest is made in most cases used gas for emergency purposes only. How about the public utilities com mission naming minimum charger" asked House Chairman Buckley, "elim- mating any possible inequalities between the big and small consumers
 \"That would not accomplish all that we are after" replied MT. Nett1eton, adding that the investment depreciation and care of the meters were the same regardless of the amount of gas used. He added that New Haven gas con- sumers would have to pay higher rate if the meter or service charges were eliminated.
 J. A. Norcross, secretary-treasurer of the New Haven company, and Fred C. 1 Taylor of Stamford also spoke in op- position to the bills. MT. Norcross said that the so-called small consumer of gas used little by choice and because of poverty. He said that the cost of a small meter was $11 and that the serv- ice charge to the small consumer was $6 year.
 "The man who pays $2 charge is discriminated against compared with the $1O man, isn't he?" asked Representa- tive Perry of New Haven.
 "He pays more," was the reply of MT. Taylor.
 Representative Hickey of Stamford, Joseph s. Blinn of New Haven, Frank c. Smith, representing the Landlords and Taxpayers Association of Hart ford Corporation Counsel L. O. Ryan of Middletown and representatives of the Hartford Central Labor Union the Connecticut Federation of Labor and others gave further arguments in favor of the bills.
 GAS COMPANY CUTS
 WAGES OF EMPLOYES