HD 
 
 4491 
 
 Fr47M
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 
 MUNICIPALITIES 
 
 .VS 
 
 Private Corporations 
 
 Political and Business Management 
 COMPARED 
 
 fM. J. prRAIMOI300
 
 /i|p
 
 MUNICIPALITIES 
 
 VS. 
 
 Private Corporations. /, 
 
 Political and Business Management 
 
 COMPARED BY 
 
 M. J. I FRANCISCO. 
 
 Tables Showing Cost of Lights Furnished by Private Com- 
 panies and Municipal Plants, a List of Municipal Plants 
 Sold or Abandoned, Experience of Municipalities, 
 Legal and Editorial Opinions. 
 
 Published by M. J. FRANCISCO & SON, 
 
 RUTLAND, VERMONT. 
 
 1900 : 
 
 THE TUTTLE COMPANY. PRINTERS, 
 
 RUTLAND. VT.
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 The author commenced the investigation and study 
 of municipal ownership in 1885. Twelve years' practi- 
 cal experience in electric lighting enables him to anal- 
 ize statements and reports of electric plants. 
 
 He sold his plant and withdrew from the business 
 three years ago. 
 
 This, and all other books published by the author, 
 have been at his own expense, without the knowledge, 
 aid or money from any party or corporation ; is not now, 
 and never has been, the attorney for, or employed as such, 
 by any corporation or electric light company. 
 
 While manager of the local electric light company, 
 was elected president of the National Electric Light 
 Association of the United States, which enabled him to 
 secure valuable information regarding electric lighting, 
 but is not now a member of that association. 
 
 The object of this book is to furnish reliable facts in 
 relation to private and municipal plants. 
 
 The reports, regarding municipal plants given in 
 this work, are made from city records signed by a respon- 
 sible official. 
 
 In every case where positive and reliable information 
 could not be procured, the report of that city has been 
 omitted. 
 
 Copyrighted, 1900, by 
 M. J. Fkancisco.
 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM AN ADDRESS DELIVERED 
 BY M. J. FRANCISCO, BEFORE THE 
 LEAGUE OF AMERICAN MUNICIPALI- 
 TIES. 
 
 •^ The functions of a municipality are to govern and 
 regulate. It is a well-established axiom that to govern 
 successfully requires that one shall be wholly disinter- 
 ested, while ownership implies the greatest self interest. 
 
 Therefore, we have two propositions that are directly 
 antagonistic. The experience of years has demonstrated 
 that at the present time all business enterorises require 
 rare ability and experience, Cif not genius] to succeed. 
 Great financiers and successful men have devoted their 
 lives to the study and practice of their trade or profession. 
 How is it possible then for municipalities to expect such 
 qualifications from officials whose term of office is for one 
 or two years ? 
 
 Permitting a municipality to engage in speculative 
 ventures, or commercial industries, involves a most serious 
 question, reversing the policy that has governed cities for 
 hundreds of years, allowing them to assume all the hazards, 
 risks and liabilities that attend the investment of money 
 in business enterprises. 
 
 In doing this, the city abandons its governing power 
 for which the municipality was created, and becomes a 
 speculator and a competitor for gain, and if it is eiectric 
 Hgiitrcrg, in case of a profit, those who use and pay for its 
 ^' -ppodttetie-n are taxed for the benefit of those who do not, 
 while in the case of a loss all parties owning property are 
 --^taxed for the benefit of users of electric-light. 
 
 Judge Dillon says: "The legislature should be 
 prohibited from allowing municipal corporations to engage 
 in extra municipal projects, or to incur debts or levy taxes 
 
 3 
 
 1521871
 
 for such purposes. To clothe them with powers to ac- 
 complish purposes, which can better be left to private 
 enterprise, is unwise. Their chief function should be to 
 regulate and govern. To invest them with the powers of 
 individuals or private corporations, for objects not per- 
 taining to municipal rule, is to pervert the institution 
 from its legitimate ends, and to require of it duties it is 
 not 9,dapted satisfactorily to execute." 
 
 If the municipality should assume these powers, they 
 could absorb all business and manufacturing, sell all 
 .goods, and control every branch of trade. This AVould 
 destroy competition, stop all development, and make the 
 restless masses helpless and dependent upon the munici- 
 pality ; mere serfs, in fact. 
 
 Imagine, for a moment, the condition of the United 
 States if all municipalities were to adopt this system, 
 with the well-known working plan of American politics, 
 based upon the familiar saying, ' ' to the victor belongs 
 the spoils." and these spoils available when either party 
 is victorious. We should have all industries placed in 
 charge of incompetent political tools, and, as Prof. Whit- 
 ney says, "every new position placed at the disposal of 
 the city officials tightens the grip of the ring boss upon 
 the treasury of the city." 
 
 The management of |hese inexperienced politicians 
 would be so unwieldly that there could be no accounta- 
 bility, no economy, and the city would become an instru- 
 ment of oppression, which would eventually result in 
 anarchy. It is fear of such an army of office-holders that 
 causes conservative men to look with undisguised dread 
 upon the paternal tendency of municipalities, for the 
 trend is toward socialism, and they know that there is 
 reason for caution. 
 
 We are told that competition is a failure. Then why 
 not have regulation by law? It is and can be successful, 
 and the experience of cities and states proves that this is 
 the true remedy, and not municipal ownership. Massa-
 
 chusetts has a commission to control and regulate busi- 
 ness and prices charged, stipulate the amount of stock and 
 bonds that may be issued, control all competition. If any 
 taxpayer or municipality feels aggrieved by the acts of 
 the private corporation or prices charged, they can at 
 once apply to this commission for relief, which is seldom 
 refused. 
 
 By this system of regulation and control, the interest 
 of the public is protected, and at the same time the in- 
 vestment of private capital is encouraged and fostered. 
 
 It is claimed that municipalities have operated water 
 works successfully. Then why not electric lights? 
 
 There is no analogy between the two. Nature fur- 
 nishes the water free, and all that is necessary is to conduct 
 it to the place where it is to be used. The apparatus re- 
 quired is simple and plain, not liable to accidents, has been 
 in use for a generation, and will be used for a generation to 
 come. There is no manufacture, it is simply the distri- 
 bution of a natural product, while the outfit for an electric 
 light plant and the manufacture of electricity requires the 
 most intricate and complex machinery known to man, and 
 is changing and being improved constantly. This deli- 
 cate apparatus is subject to accidents of all kinds, and a 
 heavy loss in transmission. One flash of lightning may 
 wipe out thousands of dollars in value, or an accident 
 similar to the one that occurred in the station where a 
 crane was being moved, and the hook, slipping from the 
 attendant's hand, struck a generator, and not only de- 
 stroyed it, but the station, as well as the lives 
 of several employes, involving a loss requiring an outlay 
 of many thousand dollars ; apparatus, where a careless 
 movement of a plug upon the switch board would cause a 
 short circuit, the effect of which no one, unless they have 
 witnessed the action of a 3000-volt current under such 
 conditions, can realize ; a business requiring the most 
 faithful men, who have by years of experience proved
 
 their ability, and who therefore can command a salary- 
 commensurate with the responsibility they assume. 
 
 With such obstacles to contend with, how can we ex- 
 pect success in a city plant operated by inexperienced 
 men, with constant jealousy and bickering between the 
 managers, who are members of council made up from 
 politicians of opposing political parties ? 
 
 Hon. Charles Waring said " that he favored the pur- 
 chase of street railways in Great Britain, but that in the 
 United States it would be utterly out of the question, on 
 account of the attendant political evils." 
 
 The restless, tireless brain of the inventor may 
 evolve apparatus in the next few years that will revolu- 
 tionize the business, and the machines in use at the pres- 
 ent time will become worthless, not because they are 
 worn out, but by reason of the new invention which can 
 produce the light at so much less expense that it would 
 necessitate scrapping the present outfit and purchasing 
 the new style. 
 
 Private companies have already had this experience 
 in the past, and doubtless will suffer in the same way in 
 the future. Why then is not a municipality liable to the 
 same loss if it embarks in the business ? It is expected 
 that a great revolution in the methods of generating elec- 
 tricity will be adopted in the near future, and the plan is 
 being agitated of generating it directly from coal, thus 
 avoiding the expense of steam and its attendant machin- 
 ery. If this plan succeeds, the hundreds- of thousands 
 of dollars that municipalities have, and may invest in the 
 present style of machines, will be relegated to the scrap 
 pile. ■ 
 
 Electrical invention is in its infancy. When it has 
 attained its full growth, mankind will look back with 
 wonder at the ignorance displayed by the people of the 
 present generation. 
 
 The public have been deceived in reference to the 
 cost of lights when furnished by the municipality. Mu- 
 
 6
 
 nicipal accounts are so kept that in many cases it is im- 
 possible for the authorities themselves to ascertain the 
 cost, and the persons in charge have a direct personal in- 
 terest in making a favorable showing. The objection 
 made by taxpayers, who oppose municipal ownership of 
 business enterprises, is a strong inducement on the part 
 of officials who favor it to make the apparent cost as small 
 as possible. 
 
 Prof. Adams once said: "Facts regarding city 
 financiering are simply appalling. It is not too much to 
 say that every rule laid down by the science of financer- 
 ing has been disregarded by our cities." The political 
 pressure for extension of the service, without reference to 
 profitable returns, is irresistible. It is well understood 
 and acknowledged that strict economy and the best busi- 
 ness methods necessary for success are not considered under 
 political management. It is useless to argue that politics 
 will not creep into the business. History proves the con- 
 trary, and parties now announce that they favor the sys- 
 tem as an inducement for votes. Ex-mayor Hewitt says : 
 " However well disposed the officers of a city may be 
 toward the proper performance of their duty, they are 
 necessarily constrained and overruled by the exigencies 
 of partisan interests, and compelled to reward political 
 service by public office." 
 
 They tell us that the corruption and frauds of the 
 present day have been caused by the acts of private cor- 
 porations ; that they buy and bribe city officials, and that 
 municipal ownership will stop all of this demoralization 
 and misrule under which cities are suffering. 
 
 If this condition exists, as they claim, and city offi- 
 cials can be bought or bribed by corporations, is it not 
 certain that, when such men have the direct handling of 
 the millions involved where the city own the plant, they 
 would certainly supply themselves with funds at the city's 
 expense? If the man was dishonest in the first case, 
 would he not be equally so in the latter? If we were to
 
 believe their statements, we must concede that all the 
 scoundrels in this country belong to corporations, and that 
 no others are admitted to such companies, and that 
 none of this class were ever found among politicians or 
 ring bosses. There must be two parties to bribery. The 
 representative of the corporation, no matter how venal, 
 would never approach an official for this purpose, unless 
 he had been given a plain intimation that the official was 
 willing to participate in such a deal. From the socialist 
 standpoint, there is nothing dishonorable in the official 
 accepting the bribe, but the party representing the corpo- 
 ration who offers it is the greatest scoundrel in existence. 
 Are not both equally guilty? 
 
 The records and evidence disclosed in New York and 
 other cities shows plainly that many seek such offices with 
 the expectation of such offers, and are figuring for what 
 "there is in it." 
 
 As Andrew D. White once remarked ; " With a few 
 exceptions, the city governments in the United States are 
 the worse in Christendom, the most expensive and the 
 most corrupt." 
 
 The remedy for all these evils complained of is sim- 
 ple. Elect men of integrity and responsibility to these 
 offices, who can and will protect its citizens against not 
 only the corporations, but the bosses and political thieves 
 as well. Until this is done, all the plans and theories of 
 municipal ownership on the face of the earth will not con- 
 vert a dishonest politician and cause him to renounce his 
 hunger and greed for th'e emoluments and pickings to be 
 obtained while occupying some official position. 
 
 Harper s Weekly, referring to the politicians and ring 
 bosses of Philadelphia, says: "They are reported to be 
 in affluent circumstances, or on the high road to wealth, 
 although in many instances 'the salaries attached to their 
 positions are small, as in the case of the magistrate, or 
 nothing at all as in the case of the councilman. How 
 then do these men make their money? Are they shrewd
 
 business men and engaged in outside enterprises not 
 purely political or dependent upon the action of political 
 bodies for existence or favors? But two out of the thirty- 
 seven ward leaders are men of means acquired before 
 they went actively into politics. The question therefore 
 logically arises, did they make their money through 
 politics, and if so. by what means ?" 
 
 There are plenty of instances where capable and up- 
 right men have held office, and while this has been done, 
 you do not hear of any concessions made to corporations 
 that were injurious or prejudicial to the interest of its 
 citizens. If such men are elected they will command the 
 confidence and respect of the world, and will perform 
 their duties fearlessly, and inaugurate a system of order 
 and business that will remedy the chaos now existing in 
 many cities ; besides, by this course, you will destroy the 
 feeling that there is a moral taint attaching to any 
 reputable man who enters a contest for office. 
 
 Referring again to Judge Dillon, the highest au- 
 thority on municipal law, sa3-s : ' ' Our large cities are 
 encountering the perils of corruption and fraud on a 
 gigantic scale, engendered by the large revenues and offi- 
 cial patronage at their disposal, and the disinclination, 
 often the steady refusal, of the substantial citizens, to take 
 a controlling part in the management of municipal 
 affairs." 
 
 / The whole foundation of municipal ownership is 
 based upon the assumption that inexperienced hired em- 
 ployes of a city, who have not a dollar at risk and in 
 many cases have been given the position as a reward for 
 helping^ some political aspirant to office, can and will run 
 the plant and manage the business more successfully than 
 members of a private corporation, notwithstanding the 
 latter may have nearly all their property invested in the 
 enterprise, and a failure means ruin for them. Is it not 
 reasonable to suppose that men under such conditions will 
 give closer attention to business, and guard and investi-
 
 gate every branch and detail of its work? It is a well- 
 settled axiom that the more a man has at risk, the closer 
 attention he gives to its details and economy.. 
 
 As ex-mayor Fitler says: " A little mismanagement 
 here, a little extravagance there, would change the divi- 
 dends of the private companies to municipal deficits, and 
 when they advocate municipal operation of street railway 
 lines they advocate an experiment, the effect of which 
 they know absolutely nothing about and have no possible 
 means of calculating." 
 
 Hon. Charles O'Connor said that ' ' by means of general 
 laws admitting no favoritism or partiality, all requisite 
 facilities through corporate forms should be afforded 
 individuals for conducting every description of lawful 
 business, so as to prevent any needless action by the 
 municipality, or the employment of its officers in any 
 affairs that could be committed to individuals as a busi- 
 ness." 
 
 The statement of the city clerk of Tacoma shows that 
 when the city furnished their own power it cost them two 
 and sixty-four one-hundredth cents per kilowatt, and now 
 they buy it of a private corporation for one and sixty-two 
 hundredths of a cent per kilowatt, demonstrating that be- 
 cause of the care and close attention given to the business 
 by the private company they can afford to furnish the 
 current at a less price than it costs the city to produce it in 
 their own plant. 
 
 Every one knows just how an election is managed in 
 American cities. As soon as a man is elected he must pay 
 his followers for their support by distributing the offices at 
 his command, and as he has been elected by the political 
 leaders' management, he must acquiesce in their demands, 
 no matter what the result may be upon the affairs of the 
 city. This has been the rule of the government as well 
 as municipalities, and an official in the post-office depart- 
 ment once said: "The blind policy of substituting 
 inexperienced for experienced men comes at every elec- 
 
 10
 
 tion ; wholej'^lines are stripped of their experienced men 
 and the creatures of politicians are put in their places." 
 
 The majority of voters in all cities are practically 
 non-taxpayers, that is, they pay only a poll tax, and, 
 therefore, it is immaterial to them what the expenses are, 
 provided they can secure the favor of the ward boss, and 
 this party seeks every opportunity of impressing upon 
 them his ability as a political fighter. The North Ameri- 
 can Review truly sa.ys : "The constant element in muni- 
 cipal affairs is the unremitting desire of the politician to 
 gather masses of votes, and of the contractors to place 
 men, who furnish them, to prey upon the city treasury. 
 The people who do not pay are always ready to create 
 debts against the people who must pay." 
 
 Prof. Bryce said: "That the Pliiladelphia gas ring 
 controlled at least 20,000 votes, and the number of men 
 employed in a gas plant is very small when compared with 
 the number employed in other lighting works." 
 
 We are told that where city owns the plant they 
 can produce the lights for half the amount it costs private 
 companies, but it has never been proven, and can not be. 
 Assertions are not evidence, while it is a fact that the cost 
 of municipal work is notoriously greater. We have an 
 example of the economy of public work in the capital at 
 Albany. 
 
 John Stewart Mills well says: " The mischief begins 
 when, instead of calling forth the activity and powers of 
 individuals, it substantiates its own activity for theirs." 
 
 It is well known that municipal ownership is purely 
 and simply a political move to secure votes for some 
 aspirant for office, and that it is used for this purpose, 
 legardless of any other question. Parties have publicly 
 announced that they are using it as a plank upon which to 
 stand while they gather in the votes. It has become a 
 well-established principle with both political parties that 
 city government is the legitimate spoils of the victorious 
 party. It is for the purpose of catching the votes of the 
 
 11
 
 laboring class that lower rates of taxation, with -shorter 
 hours and higher wages, are promised, but these are for- 
 gotten as soon as the election has passed, as was shown in 
 Detroit and other places. 
 
 In Alameda, Cal., it was carried so far that men were 
 forced to work in the municipal plant fourteen hours at a 
 run, and the engineers have fainted at their post as a 
 result of such overwork. The Alameda Argus says: 
 " The light it sells is sold at a loss. As a business venture 
 Alameda's experiment is a rank and wretched failure. 
 As a pet scheme of the municipal ownership faddist it will 
 flourish as long' as the people submit to the high taxes 
 which it imposes." 
 
 When the advocates of municipal ownership find 
 themselves unable fo disprove the facts disclosed under 
 municipal management in this country, they immediately 
 ■ fall back upon Glasgow and the wonders achieved there 
 by municipal ownership. The conditions are not the 
 same in Glasgow as are found in the United States. The 
 government is entirely different, and the political situation 
 that exists in this country is not found there. Wages 
 there are less than half those paid in this countr3^ Con- 
 ductors on street cars are paid 93 cents per day the first 
 year, and $1.04 the third year, while conductors on street 
 cars in New York are paid §2.00 the first year and $2.25 
 after that. The average wages for the railroad men in 
 Glasgow are 78 cents per day, while in New York it is 
 $1.88. Here we have a difference of more than 100 per 
 cent in wages alone. 
 
 Any one who has traveled over the street railroads in 
 Glasgow knows perfectly well that the whole equipment 
 and accommodations are antiquated and behind the age, 
 while the service furnished there would not be tolerated 
 in any city in the United States. We are also told that 
 the profits or revenue from the street railway in Glasgow 
 is so large that it pays all the expenses of the government, 
 while, in fact, the roads are not operated for the purpose 
 
 12
 
 of producing a revenue to meet current expenses of the 
 municipality. Instead of there being no taxes in Glasgow, 
 they are more burdensome than in this country. Rents 
 are taxed 12^ cents on every dollar that a man pays, and 
 the owner of the property has to pay the same amount of 
 tax; besides this license taxes are levied. You pay a tax 
 for every servant you employ in the house, also on every 
 horse or carriage ; in fact, you cannot turn round without 
 running against a tax collector. Mr. Robert Crawford of 
 Glasgow, a strong advocate of the system in that city, 
 says : " Before I came to this country I saw no reason why 
 American cities should not adopt municipal ownership, and 
 wondered why they had not done so. But now that I 
 have obtained an insight into the conditions that prevail 
 in your cities I have entirely changed my views. As 
 things are now in your cities, municipal ownership is an 
 impossibility. Success in that great undertaking is out 
 of the question so long as party politics figure in municipal 
 elections, and so long as city offices are used to reward 
 political work. With the conditions that exist in American 
 cities to-day, municipal ownership is utterly impracticable. 
 It can never be a success until the system of political 
 rewards is entirely divorced from city government. ' 
 
 This is the testimony of a citizen of Glasgow after he 
 had visited the United States and studied our political 
 management. 
 
 ■ The financiering plans of socialists and economists, as give^i 
 in a book lately published, is certainly original. They say : 
 ' ' The bonded debt incurred by a private company is looked upon 
 as a?i investment, and not a burden — it is never to be paid off', 
 ivhile, on the other liand, in a public industry a debt is a burden 
 to be liquidated as soon as possible." That is, if a private com- 
 pany issues bonds, it is so much clear gain, they will never 
 have to be paid ; but if the city issues them they are a debt, 
 and must be paid. Perhaps some of our learned friends will 
 tell us how a mortgage, given by a private company, is an 
 asset, while the same mortgage, if given by the city, is a 
 
 13
 
 liability ? Yet such arguments are advanced in the support 
 of municipal ownership. 
 
 If the advocates of municipal ownership desired to 
 give a fair comparison between private and public owner- 
 ship and furnish taxpayers facts, they would compare the 
 cost by the two systems as shown at the present time. 
 Instead of this they quote prices charged by private com- 
 panies ten years ago, when everything cost more than 
 three times what it does now, and then compare the cost 
 of the municipal plant at the present day. In ISSS, when 
 the private companies were furnishing the lights, the 
 dynamo used cost $43.20 per arc, while the lamps cost 
 $50.00 ; now the dynamo would only cost $19 per arc, and 
 the lamps $22.50. Carbons cost then from $40 to $50 p^r 
 thousand, now they can be bought for $10. 
 
 Why is it that advocates of municipal ownership con- 
 stantly decry private corporations ? Is it for political 
 effect, or to cover some of their own schemes ? 
 
 If we could roll back the wheels of time for one 
 hundred years, we should find people trucking their grain 
 to market with ox teams, travelers wending their way 
 through the country upon horses and in the. old lumbering 
 stage coach or the prairie schooner, dragging its slow way 
 across the continent ; letters and papers delivered from 
 five days to nine months after they were written or 
 printed ; transactions in London not reported in New 
 York until weeks and months after they occurred, while 
 any communication with California was almost impossible. 
 
 In place of this crude and expensive system, the busi- 
 ness man of to-day can breakfast in New York and dine in 
 Buffalo, or he can leave the Atlantic coast on Monday, 
 climb the Rocky Mountains, covering 4, 000 miles of space, 
 and bask in the genial air of the Pacific coast on Friday ; 
 sit at his breakfast table and read the accounts of what was 
 done the evening before in England, Russia, China, South 
 Africa, and, in fact, news from every civilized country in 
 the world ; stand at his counter in New York or Boston 
 
 14
 
 and talk with his agent in Chicago; flash a message 
 around the world and receive an answer in twenty minutes. 
 All of these wonders are the creation of private cor- 
 porations. It is these corporations that have made 
 America what she is, the grandest and most powerful 
 nation upon the face of the globe. 
 
 15
 
 DEPRECIATION. 
 
 "Depreciation should not only account for the actual 
 deterioration of the apparatus due to its use, but should 
 include the reduction in the market price of apparatus, 
 and the loss upon apparatus which becomes commercially- 
 useless through the progress of the art, as well as those 
 appliances w^hich may become valueless, not because they 
 are worn out or out of date, but because the growth of the 
 business in that particular locality makes it no longer 
 economical to use them, and although in condition to do 
 the work for which they were orginally designed, never- 
 theless become practically useless through the necessity 
 for a reconstruction or rearrangement of the works to 
 meet new conditions." 
 
 Experience is the best teacher and will demonstrate 
 fully the length of time apparatus will run successfully. 
 When the apparatus becomes worn, and is old and an- 
 tiquated, no company can afford to use it on account of 
 the heavy per cent of loss in producing the lights. For 
 this reason, little or nothing can be obtained, for the old 
 machinery and the value of tlie plant when renewed would 
 be no greater than when first erected. 
 
 Wabash, Ind., used dynomos and lamps, costing 
 $1,800 for six years, and then sold them for old junk. 
 
 Alameda, Cal., sold apparatus costing $20,000, after 
 seven years' use, for $350. 
 
 Xenia, Ohio, sold apparatus costing $35,000 for 
 $10,000, after using it eight years. 
 
 Marcaline, Mo., sold apparatus costing $1,600 for 
 $800, and only used it nine years. 
 
 Michigan City bought apparatus and paid $10,000, 
 used it six years, and sold it for $2,500. 
 
 16
 
 Moline paid Slo.uOO for apparatus, used it eight 
 years, and sold it for $S,000. 
 
 Gravesend, L. I., paid $120,000 for apparatus, kept it 
 two years, and sold it for $30,000. 
 
 Bloomfield, Iowa, purchased dynamos in 1891 and in 
 1896 ; they failed and had to be replaced with new ones, at 
 an expense of $5,000. 
 
 Hull, Mass. voted to borrow $2,000 to pay for repairs 
 caused by an accident during the year. 
 
 Marquette, Mich., paid $15,000 for replacing appa- 
 ratus in one year. 
 
 Northfield, Vt., had to spend $8,700 to replace ma- 
 chinery after using it two years. 
 
 Topeka, Kan., sold apparatus costing $20,000 for 
 $1,500. 
 
 Bay City, Mich., had to replace their engine after 
 six years' use. 
 
 The experts employed by the mayor of Springfield^ 
 111., made the depreciation 10 per cent per year. 
 
 The committee appointed by congress made it 10 per 
 cent. 
 
 The mayor of Decatur, 111., said after several years' 
 experience with a municipal plant, that if 10 per cent was 
 allowed for repairs, and then 10 per cent added for depre- 
 ciation, it would not be too much. 
 
 The mayor of Rock Falls, 111., says : It will be 
 noticed that I have figured a 10 per cent depreciation of 
 plant. This is by no means a high estimate for property 
 of this class, and is one that it is absolutely necessary to 
 take into consideration. It is a plain business proposition, 
 that any institution to be a safe, not to say profitable in- 
 vestment, must be capable of maintaining itself against 
 depreciation, that the property may at any time be worth 
 to its owner its original cost. There would be no surer 
 way for the city to lose money than to run the electric 
 light plant at a rate of income that only paid operating 
 expenses. In the end, the plant must become worthless 
 
 17 
 
 (2)
 
 through lack of maintenance, and the original investment 
 would certainly be lost." 
 
 The superintendent of the municipal plant at Sharps- 
 burg, Pa., says they paid $20,000 for the plant, but can 
 duplicate it complete for $10,000. 
 
 The engineer who constructed the Ypsilanti, Mich., 
 plant says that 10. per cent depreciation is very low. 
 
 The manager of the municipal plant at Marietta, 
 Ohio, says cannot be made less than 10 per cent. 
 
 The experts at the Philadelphia investigation made it 
 10 per cent. 
 
 The best expert in England states that ]0 per cent 
 is as low as it can be calculated. 
 
 Oxford, Ohio, paid $25,000 for a plant, and can now 
 duplicate it for $12,000. 
 
 Marshalltown, Iowa, paid $-1,000 for two dynamos, 
 and abandoned them after 10 years use, and can not sell 
 them for more than $600. 
 
 Detroit started plant in 1895, and in 1899 the lighting 
 commission asked for $38,000 to replace some of their 
 dynamos with new ones. * 
 
 A private company sold a dynamo, costing $1,900, 
 for $260, after six years use. 
 
 Taunton, Mass., installed a municipal plant in 1897. 
 In March, 1898, the mayor sent a communication to the 
 city council, notifying them of the breaking down of the 
 engine in the municipal plant, and recommended that 
 $5,000 be appropriated to purchase a new engine and pre- 
 pare a foundation for same. 
 
 Logansport, Ind., had to expend $12,000 in replacing 
 their engines and boilers, installed four years before. 
 
 Mayor Quincy of Boston, when he made the ten-year 
 contract with the private company to furnish the lights, 
 inserted in the contract the following agreement : " The 
 company are allowed to charge off, as against the city, 
 such depreciation as it actually provides for, but not ex- 
 ceeding seven per cent per annum on its total investment, 
 
 18
 
 exclusive of land. This limit was fixed after careful 
 consideration, and in the opinion of the city engineer it 
 represents no more than a proper allowance for this pur- 
 pose. The principle of providing for the depreciation of 
 a plant which deterioates, or becomes obsolete as rapidly 
 as an electric light plant does, is the only proper one, and 
 it seemed to me that sound public policy required the city 
 to provide for a sufficient allowance for depreciation, 
 rather than ignore this necessary element of cost, as is 
 too often done." 
 
 The city clerk's books of Little Rock show that they 
 spent between 1888 and 1892 $39,704.80 constructing the 
 electric plant. 
 
 In 1894 they appropriated $30,000 more, making a 
 total of $09,022. 
 
 In the city clerk's report for 1895 he states that the 
 total value of the plant at that time was $35,000. 
 
 Here is a shrinkage of about 50 per cent in less than 
 seven years. If there is only three per cent depreciation 
 on electrical apparatus, as claimed by advocates of muni- 
 cipal ownership, why is it that a plant costing $69,622 at 
 the end of seven years is only worth $35,000, and at the 
 end of ten years, in 1899, it is necessary to spend $50,000 
 more to put the plant in proper shape to do their business? 
 
 Halletsville, Texas, had to abandon their old plant and 
 construct a new one, the old one being out of date. 
 
 Toledo, Ohio, invested $2,000,000 in a municipal 
 plant, and after ten years the highest bid they could get 
 for it was $300,000, making a loss of $1,700,000. 
 
 Swanton, Vt., a pulley burst and destroyed instantly 
 a dynamo that cost $3,000 to replace, and it only had been 
 used a short time. 
 
 Ex-mayor Matthews of Boston, whose ability and 
 integrity is beyond question, after an examination of the 
 municipal plant at Detroit, says: "We must make full 
 allowance for the depreciation in the plant due to wear 
 
 19
 
 and tear, to the progress of invention, and to the occasional 
 necessity for enlargement and reconstruction. 
 
 " I estimate a proper allowance for depreciation on 
 this plant as follows ; Buildings, machine shop, scales, 
 etc., four per cent; steam plant, seven per cent ; electric 
 plant and overhead system, ten per cent ; conduits and 
 cables, five per cent. 
 
 " These allowances average about seven and one-half 
 per cent on the first cost of the plant, exclusive of the 
 land. 
 
 " Depreciation is the main reason why portions of an 
 electric light plant must, from time to time, be discarded 
 and sold for old material, but is not, however, due to the 
 actual use and wear of the machinery, but to the fact that 
 the progress of electrical invention is so rapid that from 
 time to time entirely new machinery is put upon the mar- 
 ket, so superior in economy of operation that the electric 
 light companies cannot afford to keep the old machinery, 
 and to the further fact that no electric light plant is laid out 
 at the outset of sufficient dimensions to accommodate the 
 growth of business indefinitely, and accordingly there 
 arises a periodic necessity for reconstruction and enlarge- 
 ment, which incidentally involves the destruction or 
 abandonment of a part, often a considerable part, of the 
 existing buildings and machinery. These considerations 
 are, of course, well known to everybody interested in 
 electric lighting. 
 
 " Some persons, also, while admitting that the depre- 
 ciation in electric light plants, due to these causes, has 
 been fully six or seven per cent during the ten years just 
 past, contend that no such rate of depreciation is to be 
 expected in the future ; but to this it may be replied that 
 the experience of the recent past is the only safe guide to 
 the probabilites of the future, and that the manufacturers 
 of electric lighting apparatus are no more confident that 
 the limit of invention has been reached in this branch of 
 industry now than they were ten years ago." 
 
 20
 
 William Jackson, city engineer of Boston, says that a 
 fund or account should be created to cover depreciation, 
 renewals, etc. (as disting^uished from repairs), and that the 
 payments to this fund should amount annually to two per 
 cent of the cost of the buildings, five per cent of the cost 
 of boilers, etc., and ten per cent of the cost of engines, 
 generators and other electrical apparatus, including all 
 outside construction. These percentages will be found, 
 when added together, to amount to from seven to seven 
 and one-half per cent of the first cost of the entire plant, 
 or sufficient, if invested in a sinking fund, to equal, with 
 the annual increment thereon, the first cost of the plant in 
 about ten years. 
 
 An advocate of 'municipal ownership, who claims 
 nothing should be allowed for depreciation, says: ** Sup- 
 posing there is a depreciation in the municipal plant, 
 suppose the whole plant, costing half a million, is lost, all 
 that is necessary to do is to levy a tax and replace it ; if it 
 is squandered, there is plenty more that can be procured 
 by taxing the property of the citizens."' 
 
 The following extracts from the report of the lighting 
 commission of Detroit, published in the Detroit JournaL 
 shows the condition of the plant under their plan of three 
 per cent depreciation : 
 
 " The public lighting plant has been allowed wofully 
 to deteriorate. The entire power plant will have to be 
 overhauled. The lamps have not been renovated for two 
 years and are causing great trouble. The roofs of the power 
 house are leaky and defective. The line poles are rolling 
 away. There is no reserve power in the plant and more 
 power must be added. The machinery and lines have not 
 been properly maintained and will have to be overhauled 
 and repaired. The dock back of the works is rotting 
 away." 
 
 Here is the history as given by their own commission 
 of what is claimed to be the most successful municipal 
 plant in the United States. 
 
 21
 
 MUNICIPAL PLANTS SOLD OR ABANDONED. 
 
 ABERDEEN, Miss., owned the electric plant. It proved a failure, 
 and they sold it to a private company and made a contract with them for 
 the lights. 
 
 The following correspondence explains itself: 
 
 Dear Sir : — 
 
 Replying to your favor, I desire to say we have a contract with the 
 city. They owned a plant and run their own lights, but it cost them 
 S700 a year more than it does now under our contract. We boiight 
 their machinery, etc. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 AUDUBON, Iowa, tried municipal ownership and failed, then 
 leased the plant to private parties and made contract with them for 
 lights, and the lights are now furnished by the lessee. 
 
 PORTSMOUTH, Ohio, operated the municipal plant for seven 
 years, but could not make it profitable, and rented it to a private com- 
 pany and made a contract with them for lights. 
 
 WYTHEVILLE, Va., invested $10,000 in an electric plant. It 
 proved a failure, and they turned it over to a private company and made 
 a contract for lights. 
 
 WABASH, Ind.— Dear Sir :— Our city put in an arc lighting 
 plant about 1878, and ran it for nine years. After that the city made a 
 contract with the Electric Light Co,, and this has been continued ever 
 since. 
 
 The old municipal plant was sold for junk. It cost $18,000. 
 
 Yours respectfully. 
 
 It is claimed that three per cent will cover all depreciation, but this 
 city, after using the aparatus for only nine years, sold it for junk. 
 
 MOLINE, 111.— Dear Sir :— We bought the Moline City plant 
 because we could furnish them lights cheaper than they could run them 
 from their water works. The plant cost them $15,000 and we paid them 
 $8,000 for it. It cost them to run their lights for the four years they 
 operated the plant a little over $93.00 per light. We have contracted 
 with them for $84.00 per light, 2,000 candle power, run whenever it is 
 dark and they dock us if lights are out. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 PEOPLE'S POWER CO. 
 
 99
 
 MARCALINE, Mo.— Dear Sik :— The citj' ran the plant a few 
 years auil g:ave it up as a bad job, findiufjc it very expensive. After 
 lyiuf? idle some time, it was sold to the private company now running it 
 for about sISOO, which was paid in service. The property was never 
 worth anything like the price paid for it by the city. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 The plant cost 810,000 and they sold it for 8800, taking their pay in 
 service. 
 
 BERKLEY, Cal. , not lieing able to operate the plant successfully, 
 after spending a large amount of money, turned it over to a private 
 company, who have operated the lights on contract since that time. 
 
 TACOMA, Wash. — Dear Sir:— The city clerk writes saying the 
 Railway Company furnish the city power more cheaply than the city 
 could furnish its own. It cost the city 2.G-1 cents per kilowat and we 
 buy it at 1.62i cents, and we have made a five years' contract with a pri- 
 vate company. Previous to making this contract with the private com- 
 pany, and while the city operated their own power plant, they lost $19,000 
 per year. 
 
 CARROLTON, Ga.— Dear Sir :— The plant was sold to me because 
 the town could not run it satisfactorily, and for the purpose of getting 
 1)etter lights for city and commercial lighting. They pay me $30.00 
 each per year for incandescent lights. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 C. R. TURNER. 
 
 HOPE, Ark.— Dear Sir :— Myself and associates have purchased 
 the Hope water and light plant. The city sold it because they needed a 
 larger plant and they hud no money for improvements. 
 
 Yours respectfully. 
 This town has sold its water works and electric light plants and 
 granted a twenty-five years' franchise. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 S. A. KINGTON, 
 
 Recorder, Town of Hope. 
 
 MICHIGAN CITY, Ind.— Dear Sir :— In reply to your inquiry 
 will say we have sold our lighting plant for $2,500, and have contracted 
 with a private company for ten years. 
 
 Respectfully yours, 
 
 M. T. KRIDCtER, Mayor. 
 The plant cost $10,000 and they sold it for $2,500. 
 
 STOCKTON, Kas.— Dear Sir :— Replying to yours will say that 
 this city has abandoned its plant. 
 
 The reason we aljandoned the scheme was that it did not pay 
 
 expenses. 
 
 Respectfully yours. 
 
 23
 
 Portland, ore. — Dear sir:— The municipal plant was sold to 
 the Electric Light Co. "We are now paying about two prices for lights. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 Here is a case where the taxpayers were willing to pay two prices 
 for lights to a private company rather than operate their municipal 
 plant any longer. 
 
 HUDSON" COUNTY, N. J., invested about $100,000 in a munici- 
 pal plant. It was not a success. Numerous complaints regarding the 
 inefficiency of the county employes in charge of the plant, and of fre- 
 quent breaking down of the machinery, have been made. 
 
 The failure of the plant to do the work expected disgusted all parties 
 and they voted to abandon it, and have contracted with a private com- 
 pany for the lights. 
 
 . The iV. y. Advertiser says we commend the freeholders for decid- 
 ing to abandon the job of lighting the Boulevard, and if this decision 
 had been reached three years earlier it would have saved the county 
 $65,000. The freeholders should have kept politics and political heelers 
 away from the lighting plant. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA GAS WORKS, a failure, millions involved. 
 The municipal gas plant that advocates of municipal ownership have 
 cited time and again as an illustration of the benefit to be derived where 
 a city owned the plant, has been proven an utter failure and been leased 
 to a private company for thirty years. 
 
 The strongest argument against municipal ownership of the century. 
 After a practical experience of over thirty years and a loss of millions of 
 dollars the system has been abandoned. Advocates of municipal own- 
 ership have proclaimed before every committee and in every paper pub- 
 lished favoring the system that they were making money. When the 
 truth is known and the secrets of the huge political machine is exposed, 
 it disoioses the most stupendous fraud, mismanagement and deceptive 
 bookkeeping ever conceived. 
 
 XENIA, Ohio.— Dear Sir:— 1 purchased the municipal plant of 
 this city for $10,000 ; it cost $35,000. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 TIPTON, Iowa.— Dear Sir :— Eeplying to your favor I have to 
 say that our water works and electric light plant were destroyed by 
 tire. The destruction was practicallj^ complete, about the only thing 
 saved being our artesan well. The loss was surely $2,500, and I believe 
 much more. 
 
 Yours respectfully. 
 
 T. B. MANLEY, Mayor. 
 After this the city gave a franchise to a private company and made a 
 contract for the lights. 
 
 24
 
 GRAVESEND, L. I., furniBhes the most glaring incident of the 
 ■waste of niuuicipal funds. They sold a lot of the town common lands 
 and put the proceeds into a municipal electric light plant, costing 
 $120,000. In 1897, an oiler was made of ."?2,50U for its poles, and another 
 offer of .flO.OOO for the whole p|ant. Since then the plant has been 
 eokl to the Edison Company of Brooklyn for !*31.000. Part of this will 
 he eaten up by other charges, and is all the town has to show for lauds 
 which were sold at a price far below their real value in order to install 
 this municipal plant. 
 
 LE ROY, N. Y. , was using lights furnished by a private company. 
 Advocates of municipal ownership represented to the tax payers that if 
 the municipality owned the plant a great saving could be effected. At 
 that time the Hydraulic Co. offered to light the streets for 82,000 per 
 3'ear for a term of five j'ears. The taxpayers were induced to adopt the 
 plan of municipal ownership. Now the report made to the tax paj-ers 
 by the officials calls for 84,938 to run the plant with the same number of 
 lights as offered by the private company. They were also induced to 
 invest 820,000 in the gas plant because it would be a profitable invest- 
 ment. Now the report shows receipts to be 81. ■'500 and they have got to 
 spend 81.440 for coal, leaving them 800 with which to pay the interest 
 upon ^20,000 and pay the wages of all the help needed to run the plant 
 and make inecessary repairs. They compelled the private comi)any to 
 sell the i)lant to them. It turns out that the ballot authorizing the 
 municipal plant was illegal and Justice White of Buffalo decides that 
 they cannot hold same. With their present knowledge of the business 
 and their experience, the decision is looked upon as a fortunate deliver- 
 ance from a financial burden, and the people are congratulating them- 
 selves over their escape. 
 
 FINDLAY, Ohio, tried municipal ownership with a gas plant, could 
 not succeed and have sold it to a private companj*. 
 Dear Sir : 
 
 This company has purchased the municipal gas plant from the city. 
 It was turned over to our company March 29th, 1899. This company is 
 now furnishing gas to the city under a contract. 
 We are truly yours, 
 
 J. M. BAEK, President. 
 
 MADISON, Ind -1)e.\r Sir : We bought the municipal plant of 
 this city and are furnishing the lights under contract. 
 Yours trulj'. 
 
 CHEHALIS, Wash., invested !f2(;,0C0 in an electric plant, and 
 and being unable to manage it successful!}', leased it to a private party 
 and made a contract with them to furnish the street lights, 
 
 DAYTON, Tenu. Plant is closed and for sale. Citizens say plant 
 can be bought cheap.
 
 COLUMBUS, Ohio. — Director Kaiififman of the waterworks depart- 
 ment, Columbus, Ohio, has announced that in his opinion the municipal 
 electric lighting plant, operated in connection with the water works, is 
 one of the expensive features of his department, and should be aban- 
 doned. The annual report of the director will show that the cost of 
 operating the municipal plant per lamp more than doubles the cost of 
 the contract lamps at the present time. The city council has ordered 
 an investigation. 
 
 COLUMBUS, Ohio. — The electric light fund of this city has become 
 exhausted, and Director Kauffman has announced that the municipal 
 lighting plant which furnishes current for 350 lights on the north side of 
 the city will be abandoned. The companies furnishing contract lamps 
 have been notified to re -distribute their lamps in order to cover the ter- 
 ritory in the best manner possible. 
 
 BRAINERD, Minn. — Deak Sik : I enclose report made by a com- 
 mittee of the city council : 
 
 We respectfully recommend that the question of the sale of the 
 plant be submitted to a vote of the electors of this city. The proposition 
 meets with our approval and our reasons are as follows : First — If the 
 plant is not sold, the city must, in a short time, expend large sums of 
 money to make it serviceable. Second — The ownership of the plant by 
 the city has not proven profitable to the city, and without criticising 
 anybody, we must say the service has been poor and not satisfactory. 
 Third — We may be reasonably certain that we shall get better service if 
 the plant is sold. 
 
 The tax payers confirmed this action by an overwhelming majority 
 and the plant was sold ; the purchaser failed to pay for it and it was 
 thrown back upon the city. 
 
 BOSTON, Mass.' experience with municipal ownership: Those 
 who believe in municipal and government ownership and control of most 
 productive agencies may find some pertinent facts in the report just 
 made by Mr. William Brophy, chief electrician of the Boston wire de- 
 partment, to Mayor Hart, on the electrical construction division of the 
 public buildings department. Several years ago. Mayor Quincy inaug- 
 urated the electrical construction division along with the city printing 
 plant, to protect the city treasury from the extortions of private dealers 
 and contractors. So well has the plan succeeded in the electrical con- 
 struction division that the city has paid from two to three times as much for 
 a large amount of work as private contractors wished to charge, and the 
 division is now to be closed out as soon as possible. The great difference 
 between the cost of work done by the city force and the face of the 
 tenders for the same by private concerns seems to have been largely 
 due to the class of labor employed. This point is put with no lack of 
 clearness in Mr. Brophy 's own words. He says : "A glance at the pay- 
 rolls shows that nearly 60 per cent of the men whose names they contain 
 
 26
 
 were appofntecl at the request of certain prominent gentlemen, who, to 
 say the least, are not the best judges of the necessary iiualitications of 
 the employes of this depiirtmeut. Electrical contractors employ only 
 a sutlicient number of men to meet the requirements of their busiueKS. 
 Not so with the head of this department, for when, in his judgment, 
 the force should be reduced, owing to lack of business, he meets with a 
 most decided opposition from the friends of the men whose services 
 sound businesb principles prompt him to dispense with. In nine cases 
 out of ten the men solected for dismissal, because their serWces are not 
 required, owe their appointment to some active politician, high in the 
 councils of his party, who sees to it that his friends are reinstated, 
 regardless of the city's interest of the condition of its treasury. As a 
 result of this unwarrantable interference, men are kept on the paj'-roll 
 whose services are not needed, and others who never should have been 
 emploj-ed. Discipline, which is so necessary for the success of any 
 establishment, cannot be maintained in this department so long as a 
 large i)ercentage of its employes can retain their position, not through 
 any effort of their own, but owing to party exigencies." It is charged 
 in the report that unnecessary work has been undertaken by the elect- 
 rical construction division in order to keep a large number of men 
 employed. One instance, where it was sought to undertake a very large 
 and entirelj' unnecessary piece of work, is said to be that of the new 
 court house, where the wiring was reported to endanger the building, 
 and a request was sent to the judges to have it rewired by the electrical 
 construction division. On examination by Mr. Brophy, the wiring at 
 the court house was found iu satisfactory condition. 
 
 The report goes on to give items of equipment and cost for a large 
 number of plants installed by the electrical construction division. Three 
 of the East Boston ferryboats have been equipped with electric light 
 plants at a total cost of n10,20U by the electric construction division. A 
 bid for the complete electrical equipment on these three boats and one 
 other was received from the General Electric Company, the price being 
 $6,800. Per lamp installed the General Electric jirice was $33.61, while 
 the cost to the city through the electric construction division was $47.22 
 per lamp. On another boat the Westinghouse Company bid the sum of 
 $3,1)00 for a complete plant, and the electrical construction division did 
 the job at a cost of $rj,yuO to the city. Figures for land work done by 
 the division seem about as high in proportion as do those upon the 
 water. The Ann White Yose Building at the city hospital was wired at 
 a total cost of $4,754.56, or $12.5)0 per outlet, the estimated cost being 
 $4.50 per outlet. The English High School was wired for a total cost of 
 $3,797.40, or |5.55 per lamp, the estimated fair cost being $2.25 per 
 lamp. In the Irvingtou Street Armory 943 incandescent and 24 arc 
 lamps were installed at a cost of $6,683.47, the fair estimated cost being 
 $2,571.75, or 38 per cent of the actual sum paid out. All of the plants 
 cited in the report of Mr. Brophy shows about the above proportions 
 between actual and fair estimated cost. 
 
 On all of the work reported the labor item shows nnich more than 
 
 27
 
 its usual per cent of the total cost for complete equipments; The per- 
 centage of labor to the total cost varies from 47 to 62 per cent, being in 
 most in stances nearer the higher figure. In closing, Mr. Brophy says : 
 " I think it best for you to discontinue the electrical construction divi- 
 sion, that has proved a, rest for the Tveary, a spawning bed for embryo 
 statesman, and has accomplished so little of the real work for which it 
 was organized, viz, , guarding the city treasury against the rapacity of 
 electrical contractors and dealers." 
 
 AFTON, Iowa, invested $6,500 in an electric light plant, but could 
 not succeed and leased it to a private party and made contract for lights, 
 
 ONTONAGON, Mich,— Dear Sir: — We have not operated plant 
 since 1896 ; part of the town and all of our lines were destroyed at that 
 time. 
 
 T, MOSS, 
 
 The following report comes from 
 
 HERRINGTON, Kan.— The council has determined to close down 
 the city electric light plant owing to the excess of expenses over 
 receipts. The deficiency up to the end of last year was f 5,200, and for 
 some time it has been running behind at the rate of $200 a month. 
 
 28
 
 ARC AND INCANDESCENT LIGHTS FUR- 
 NISHED BY PRIVATE COMPANIES AND 
 MUNICIPAL PLANTS. 
 
 So many wild claims have been made by the advocates 
 of municipal ownership regarding the number of lights 
 that municipalities were furnishing, that we give the fol- 
 lowing table, taken from the latest reports, showing the 
 arc and incandescent lights furnished by private companies 
 and municipal plants in all the states. 
 
 This proves that all of the municipal plants in the 
 United States are only producing 8,905 arc lights, as com- 
 pared with 264,124 furnished by private companies. That 
 only 522,257 incandescent lights are furnished by muni- 
 cipal plants, while private companies are producing 
 8,588,194. 
 
 The state of New York has only 1,223 arc and 11,900 
 incandescent lights produced in municipal plants, while 
 private companies in that state furnish 46,233 arc and 
 1,440,133 incandescents, being 37,328 more arc lights and 
 917,786 incandescents in that state alone than are produced 
 by all the municipal plants in the United States. 
 
 Connecticut has only 1S5 arc and 5,500 incandescent 
 owned by municipalities, while private companies furnish 
 0,281 arc and 134,538 incandescents. 
 
 Massachusetts has 2,027 arc and 33,500 incandescents 
 furnished by municipal plants, and there are 20,317 arc 
 and 732,515 incandescents from private plants. 
 
 The same comparison applies to all the states. 
 
 In some states not a single arc or incandescent light is 
 furnished from a municipal plant, while in a large number 
 of the states the list is so infinitely small that they would 
 hardly be noticed, and nearly all of them in small villages. 
 
 29
 
 State. 
 
 Private Companies 
 Arc. 
 
 Municipal Plants. 
 
 Alabama 2,802 
 
 Arizona 215 
 
 Arkansas 993 
 
 California 9,745 
 
 Colorado 3,584 
 
 Connecticut 5,281 
 
 Delaware 200 
 
 Florida 1,552 
 
 Georgia 3, 962 
 
 Idaho 284 
 
 Illinois 15,102 
 
 Indiana 9,622 
 
 Iowa 4,780 
 
 Kansas 2,724 
 
 Kentucky 3,302 
 
 Louisiana 2,546 
 
 Maine 2,435 
 
 Maryland 725 
 
 Massachusetts 20, 317 
 
 Michigan 9,328 
 
 Minnesota 5,352 
 
 Mississippi 915 
 
 Missouri 8,439 
 
 Montana 1,474 
 
 Nebraska 1,754 
 
 Nevada 203 
 
 New Hampshire 2,317 
 
 New Jersey 16,039 
 
 New York 46,233 
 
 North Carolina 868 
 
 North Dakota 221 
 
 Ohio 21,050 
 
 Oklahoma 276 
 
 Oregon 1,979 
 
 Pennsylvania 34,444 
 
 Rhode Island 4,537 
 
 South Carolina 616 
 
 Tennessee 2, 512 
 
 Texas 3,278 
 
 Utah 930 
 
 Vermont 1,403 
 
 Virginia 2,170 
 
 Washington 2,717 
 
 West Virginia 936 
 
 Wisconsin _, . 4,997 
 
 264,124 
 
 Incan- 
 
 Arc. 
 
 Incan- 
 
 descent. 
 
 descent, 
 
 36,275 
 
 86 
 
 1,300 
 
 13,480 
 
 
 
 25,850 
 
 247 
 
 .876 
 
 355,490 
 
 241 
 
 3,900 
 
 226,290 
 
 15 
 
 350 
 
 134,538 
 
 185 
 
 5,500 
 
 22,500 
 
 18 
 
 5,200 
 
 16,600 
 
 284 
 
 10,900 
 
 87,228 
 
 352 
 
 9,485 
 
 10,660 
 
 
 
 691,287 
 
 5j,299 
 
 38,669 
 
 175,060 
 
 2,004 
 
 47,200 
 
 232,290 
 
 508 
 
 40,995 
 
 75,125 
 
 378 
 
 1,865 
 
 102.297 
 
 410 
 
 500 
 
 70,150 
 
 7 
 
 2,000 
 
 102,525 
 
 250 
 
 6,000 
 
 27,650 
 
 76 
 
 
 732,515 
 
 2,027 
 
 33,566 
 
 383,695 
 
 4,671 
 
 68,750 
 
 165,835 
 
 748 
 
 48,268 
 
 20,800 
 
 55 
 
 3,300 
 
 357,330 
 
 1,113 
 
 25,170 
 
 74,225 
 
 64 
 
 1,555 
 
 64.670 
 
 199 
 
 5,520 
 
 3,5(10 
 
 
 
 137,170 
 
 
 
 427,221 
 
 80 
 
 7,266 
 
 1,440,133 
 
 1,223 
 
 11,900 
 
 36,355 
 
 204 
 
 8,507 
 
 11,050 
 
 131 
 
 2,750 
 
 488,937 
 
 3,080 
 
 55,742 
 
 6.040 
 
 
 
 49.595 
 
 30 
 
 775 
 
 984,245 
 
 2,363 
 
 24,370 
 
 122,668 
 
 
 
 14,300 
 
 179 
 
 3,751 
 
 92,100 
 
 190 
 
 6,490 
 
 126,380 
 
 673 
 
 16,952 
 
 28,100 
 
 18 
 
 700 
 
 76,350 
 
 81 
 
 17,300 
 
 42,325 
 
 308 
 
 1,763 
 
 76,400 
 
 713 
 
 7,300 
 
 53.590 
 
 490 
 
 
 167,370 
 
 80 
 
 3,456 
 
 8,588,194 
 
 8,905 
 
 522,257 
 
 30
 
 MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP INCREASES TAXES- 
 
 In Austin, Texas, before the municipal plant was 
 established, the tax rate was 90 cents on SlUO, now it is 
 $2.30>< on $100. 
 
 Braintree, Mass., tax levy in 1^'Jl was SlT.20 on 
 $1,000, now it is S2(i.40. 
 
 Chicopee, Mass., levy in 1897 was $13.80 on $1,000, 
 now it is $18. 
 
 Middleborough. Mass., tax levy in ls9T was $16.60 on 
 $1,000, now it is $20.65. 
 
 Needham, Mass., in 1897 was $12.60 on $1,000, now 
 it is $17. 
 
 Peabody, Mass., tax levy in 1897 was $15 on $1,000, 
 now it is $17.40. 
 
 Reading, Mass., levy in 1897 was $15.50 on $1,000, 
 now it is $17.50. 
 
 Paris, Tenn., before municipal plant was installed, 
 tax rate was 45 cents on $100, now it is $1 on $100, and 
 no sinking fund to pa)' bonds. 
 
 Union City, Tenn., before plant was purchased, tax 
 was $1.10 on $100, now it is $1.40, and this does not 
 provide a sinking fund for bonds, and they had to levy a 
 special tax of 10 cents on $100 for that purpose. 
 
 Humboldt, Tenn., tax rate was $1 on $100, now it is 
 $1.50, and they have to levy a special tax to pay bonds. 
 
 Northfield, Vt., before municipal plant was installed, 
 tax levy was 30 cents on $1, now it is 50 cents on $1. 
 
 31
 
 REPORTS OF INVESTIGATING COMMIT- 
 TEES APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCILS 
 WORTHLESS AND UNRELIABLE. 
 
 A committee from Mobile investigated cost of lights 
 at Little Rock, and reported the same to be $51 pear year, 
 the Scranton committee made cost $47, while Connorsville 
 report said it was $42, and Steubenville claimed it was 
 $60, and Youngstown went them one better and called it 
 $69.83, but the city clerk of Little Rock reported to the 
 mayor that lights cost $80.83 per lamp per year. 
 
 MUNICIPAL PLANTS IN SMALL PLACES. 
 
 Nearly all municipal plants are in small places not 
 large enough to support a private company and they are 
 compelled to install a municipal plant in order to obtain 
 the light. 
 
 There is only one plant in Arkansas in a place large 
 enough for a private company, one in California, one in 
 Florida, six in Illinois, four in Indiana, one in Iowa, one 
 in Kansas, one in Kentucky, two in Maine, three in 
 Massachusetts, four in Michigan, two in Missouri, four irt 
 New York, six in Ohio, four in Pennsylvania, three in 
 Texas, three in Virginia, one in West Virginia ; none in 
 Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Louisiana, 
 Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, 
 New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, 
 South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington 
 or Wisconsin. 
 
 It appears from the latest reports that, of the 325 
 municipal plants, 219 are in places of less than 3,000 
 population, 78 in villages between 3,000 and 10,000, and 
 only 38 in the entire United States in cities of over 10,000 
 inhabitants. 
 
 32
 
 VERY FEW MUNICIPAL PLANTS IN CITIES 
 WHERE THERE ARE PRIVATE PLANTS. 
 
 An examination of the last reports of municipal plants 
 discloses the fact that in the following states not a muni- 
 cipal plant is operated in any city where there is a private 
 plant: Alabama. Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Dela- 
 ware, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississ- 
 ippi, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New 
 Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, 
 Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South 
 Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, Wyoming; 
 while Arkansas has only one, California one, Illinois six, 
 Indiana two, Iowa two, Kansas two, Kentucky two, Maine 
 two, Maryland one, Michigan five, Missouri one, Nebraska 
 one, New York three, Ohio three, Pennsylvania three, 
 Texas three, Virginia one, Washington one, West Vir- 
 ginia one. 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM A REPORT MADE TO 
 THE CITY OF BROOKLINE, MASS. 
 
 Wishing to secure the best results, the mayor em- 
 ployed ex-mayor Matthews, of Boston, to make a thorough 
 investigation of the two systems of street lighting, viz. : 
 Municipal ownership and contract plan with private com- 
 pany. His report is as follows : 
 
 " That my prices are higher than those frequently set 
 up by theoretical advocates of municipal ownership is due, 
 first, to the very general omission by the latter of adequate 
 allowances (when any are made at all) for interest, depre- 
 ciation, insurance and taxes ; and, secondly, to the fact that 
 
 33 
 (3)
 
 many, in fact, nearly all, of the official accounts published 
 by municipal corporations of the operation of their electric 
 light plants fail to include among the actual expenses of 
 operation many items which should properly be charged 
 thereto, such as general office or administrative expenses, 
 rent, salaries, etc. 
 
 " I simply append a table, prepared by me with the 
 same care and on substantially the same basis as the esti- 
 mates for your board, of the actual cost of arc lights in some 
 of the municipalities commonly cited as proof of the ability 
 of the public to operate an electric light plant at figures 
 far below those given by the experts employed in this 
 investigation ; and in the same table, in a parallel column, 
 will be found the annual cost of these same plants as 
 claimed with wide advertisement throughout the country 
 by some of the professional advocates of municipal owner- 
 ship : 
 
 TABLE SHOWING ALLEGED AND EEAL ANNUAL COST PER LAMP OF CER- 
 TAIN MUNICIPALITIES. 
 
 Alleged 
 
 , annual cost Real annual 
 
 as made by cost as 
 
 Town or City. Number the advocates found by 
 
 of Candle of municipal ex-mayor 
 
 lights. power. ownership. Matthews. 
 
 *+Baiigor, Me 150 2,000 $48 00 $79 00 
 
 *tLewi8ton, Me 100 2,000 55 00 65 50 
 
 Peabody. Mass 150 1,200 62 00 100 05 
 
 Bay City, Mich 181 2,000 58 00 76 25 
 
 tGoshen, Ind 31 2,000 77 00 11154 
 
 tBloomington, 111 240 2,000 5100 * 93 64 
 
 Chicago, 111 1,100 2,000 96 00 18183 
 
 Elgin, 111 98 2,000 43 00 100 73 
 
 tAurora, 111 200 2,000 70 00 87 57 
 
 tFairfield, la 16 2,000 70 00 117 16 
 
 *Ypsilanti, Mich 88 2,000 36 00 77 84 
 
 *rhese ilants are run by water-power. 
 
 tThese plants are operated in connection with other works. 
 
 Brookline made contract with private company for 
 lights. 
 
 When the ten year contract for the street lights in 
 Boston was made, mayor Quincy employed ex-mayor 
 Matthews to make a thorough investigation, and the con- 
 tract was based upon facts disclosed in his report. 
 
 34
 
 COST OF LIGHTS WHEN FURNISHED BY 
 PRIVATE COMPANIES. 
 
 In the following table the hours run are the exact 
 time lights were burned, as shown by the station records, 
 and the yearly basis of the cost per hour and candle power 
 for one cent are the same as recorded on the books of 
 each company. 
 
 As many are given as space would permit : 
 
 Candle power 
 
 Cost per hotir 
 
 Private Company. Coal. Hours run. per hour. for one cent. 
 
 No. 1. Michigan $2 25 4,000 $ .0195 615 
 
 " 2. Oregon. 1,500 .042 404 
 
 3. Michigan 2 15 1,500 .04 1,000 
 
 4. New Jersey 3 25 2,000 .04 300 
 
 " 5. Pennsylvania.... GO 4,000 .0187 1,009 
 
 " 6. Kansas 1 90 2,100 .0314 636 
 
 •' 7. South Carolina. . . w. p. 2,100 .0171 701 
 
 " 8. Wisconsin 4 25 4,000 .0162 987 
 
 9. Illinois 100 4,200 .0214 "934 
 
 " 10. Ohio 165 2,400 .0283 424 
 
 " 11. Georgia w. p. .4,500 .0155 1,290 
 
 " 12. Illinois 130 2,200 .0383 524 
 
 " 13. -Ohio 145 4,000 .0209 957 
 
 " 14. California 6 75 2,200 .043 465 
 
 " 15. Michigan w. p. 4,000 .0118 1,695 
 
 " 16. New York 2 15 4,000 .0189 634 
 
 " 17. Indiana 1 90 1,500 .046 434 
 
 " 18. Ohio 2 30 2,200 .0454 440 
 
 " 19. Montana 3 75 4,000 .03 666 
 
 " 20. Pennsylvania.... 110 4,000 .02 1,000 
 
 " 21. Montana 2 00 4,000 .024 500 
 
 " 22. Pennsylvania.... 66 4,000 .0175 1,142 
 
 " 23. Nebraska 3 00 4,300 .0293 682 
 
 " 24. California 2 50 4,000 .024 833 
 
 25. Pennsylvania .... n. g. 4,000 .0162 925 
 
 " 26. Pennsylvania.... n. G. 4,000 .0178 1,123 
 
 " 27. Illinois 150 1,403 .0296 405 
 
 " 28. Pennsylvania... 2 10 4,000 .024 833 
 
 " 29. Wisconsin 2 25 2,550 .0267 749 
 
 30. Illinois 65 2,170 .0345 579 
 
 " 31. New York 2 10 4,300 .0229 873 
 
 " 32. Connecticut 3 00 4,000 .0237 506 
 
 " 33. Michigan w. p. 4,500 .0155 774 
 
 " 34. Iowa 2 25 1,500 .04 500 
 
 " 35. Colorado 140 2,300 .0426 469 
 
 " 36. Tennessee 1 25 2,200 .0314 636 
 
 " 37. Indiana 75 2,200 .0272 735 
 
 35
 
 Cost 
 
 Private Company. Joal. Hours run. per hour. 
 
 No. 38. Wisconsin w. p. 4,000 $.(.212 
 
 39. Tennessee $ 1 65 4,000 .0217 
 
 40. West Virginia.... 90 2,200 .0327 
 
 41.. New Jersey 1 85 4,300 .0279 
 
 42. Tennessee 1 75 4,000 .024 
 
 48. New Hampshire.. 6 50 4,000 .0187 
 
 44. Georgia w. p. 2,868 .0296 
 
 45. Ohio 150 4,000 .0162 
 
 46. Illinois 175 2,200 .0318 
 
 47. Iowa 1 25 3,000 .03 
 
 48. Indiana 180 4,000 .0187 
 
 49. Illinois 125 1,400 .0257 
 
 50. Pennsylvania.... 135 4,000 .0192 
 
 51. Colorado 1 10 3,000 .04 
 
 52. Texas 3 35 4,200 .0257 
 
 53. South Dakota.... 3 50 4,500 .04 
 
 54. Connecticut 4 65 1,743 .04 
 
 55. Pennsylvania.... 2 00 4,000 .018 
 
 56. Ohio...... 1 05 3,000 .0256 
 
 57. Ohio 167 3,674 .0217 
 
 58. Maine w. p. 2,000 .0375 
 
 59. Indiana 2 40 4,000 .0168 
 
 60. Oregon 2 50 4,500 .024 
 
 61. Wisconsin 4 00 4,000 .0185 
 
 62. Ohio 190 4,000 .0206 
 
 63. Pennsylvania.... 150 4,200 .0147 
 
 64. Indiana N. G. 4,200 .02 
 
 65. New York 2 25 .4,000 .02 
 
 66. West Virginia.... 1 40 4,000 .02 
 
 67. North Dakota.... 6 50 4,200 .0285 
 
 68. Indiana 2 10 4,000 .015 
 
 69. Ohio 1 70 4,000 .0225 
 
 70. Virginia w. p. 2.000 .0375 
 
 71. Ohio 125 4,000 .0173 
 
 72. Indiana 1 60 4,000 .0225 
 
 78. New York w. p. 2, 200 . 0272 
 
 74. Connecticut 3 00 2,200 .05 
 
 75. North Carolina. . . 3 35 2.500 .035 
 
 76. Ohio 3 00 3,600 .0234 
 
 77. Montana w. p. 4,500 .024 
 
 78. Pennsylvania .... 60 4,000 .02 
 
 79. Illinois 1 25 2, 100 .0342 
 
 80. Wisconsin 1 75 2,200 .034 
 
 81.- New York 2 25 3,500 .0228 
 
 82. New York 3 85 4,200 .0219 
 
 88. New York 3 50 4,500 .0192 
 
 84. Alabama 1 75 4,000 .0225 
 
 85. Texas 3 00 4,000 .027 
 
 86. Michigan 2 65 1,500 .04 
 
 87. Texas 4 25 4,000 .03 
 
 88. Pennsylvania 2 00 4,200 .0196 
 
 89. Pennsylvania.... 2 25 1,400 .0385 
 90; Michigan 2 75 4,000 .0225 
 
 91. West Virginia.... 1 00 4,000 .0225 
 
 92. West Virginia.... 2 50 2,200 .034 
 
 93. Ohio 1 65 2,200 .031)7 
 
 94. Michigan 2 50 1,500 .033 
 
 95. New York 2 25 4,000 .0287 
 
 Candle cower 
 
 per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 948 
 921 
 366 
 716 
 833 
 641 
 675 
 740 
 628 
 666 
 
 1,069 
 467 
 
 1,041 
 500 
 778 
 500 
 800 
 
 1,111 
 781 
 921 
 588 
 
 1,190 
 883 
 
 1,081 
 970 
 
 1.360 
 
 1,000 
 
 600 
 
 . 1,000 
 
 701 
 
 1,833 
 888 
 820 
 
 1,156 
 888 
 735 
 240 
 342 
 854 
 833 
 
 1,000 
 584 
 352 
 886 
 547 
 
 1,041 
 888 
 740 
 500 
 666 
 
 1,020 
 519 
 533 
 888 
 352 
 507 
 454 
 843 
 
 36
 
 Private Company. Coal. Hours run. 
 
 No. 96. North Dakota $ 5 25 1,500 
 
 «' 97. PennBylvania 1 30 4,000 
 
 " 98. Pennsylvania 100 4,200 
 
 •• 99. New York 3 95 4,000 
 
 ' ' 100. Wisconsin 3 65 4.000 
 
 " 101. Ohio 80 2,200 
 
 ♦' 102. Iowa 188 2.586 
 
 " 103. Michigan 140 4,000 
 
 " 104. Ohio 1 80 4,200 
 
 " 105. Wisconsin 175 2.500 
 
 " 106. Indiana n. g. 4,000 
 
 '« 107. New York 2 86 4,000 
 
 " 108. Minnesota 3 50 4,000 
 
 " 109. New York 2 85 4,000 
 
 ' • 110. Kentucky 1 25 4,000 
 
 " 111. Nebraska 2 25 4,000 
 
 " 112. Pennsylvania 2 10 4,200 
 
 " 113. New Hampshire. . w. p. 3,650 
 
 " 114. New York 2 05 4,000 
 
 " 115. Illinois 3 75 1,728 
 
 " 116. Indiana 1 50 4,000 
 
 •• 117. Tennessee 2 25 4,200 
 
 " 118. Wisconsin 1 25 4.000 
 
 «' 119. Ohio 2 29 1,500 
 
 *• 120. Pennsylvania 115 4,400 
 
 " 121. Ohio 1 85 3,000 
 
 " 122. Connecticut 3 40 3,500 
 
 " 123. Alabama 2 90 4,000 
 
 " 124. Georgia 2 80 4,000 
 
 " 125. Wisconsin 4 00 4,000 
 
 " 126. Wisconsin 3 55 4.000 
 
 " 127. Wisconsin 3 00 2,150 
 
 " 128. Michigan 3 00 4,000 
 
 •' 129. Pennsylvania 175 4,000 
 
 " 130. Pennsylvania 2 55 1,400 
 
 • ' 131. New York 3 00 4, 000 
 
 " 132. Illinois 1 50 4,000 
 
 - 133. Ohio 1-75 4,000 
 
 " 134. Pennsylvania w. p. 4,400 
 
 *' 135. Connecticut 3 60 3,300 
 
 " 136. California '.. w. p. 4,000 
 
 " 137. New Hampshire.. 4 25 4,000 
 
 " 138. Pennsylvania 4,500 
 
 " 139. Pennsylvania 125 4,000 
 
 " 140. Tennessee 1 70 4,000 
 
 " 141. Virginia 2 41 4,000 
 
 " 142 Wisconsin 3 50 2,200 
 
 " 143. Ohio 1 50 2,150 
 
 " 144. Maine 5 00 1,400 
 
 '♦ 145. Khode Island ... . 300 4,000 
 
 " 146. Connecticut 3 00 4,000 
 
 " 147. Arkansas 3 45 4,200 
 
 " 148. Illinois 50 4.000 
 
 " 149. Colorado 75 2,900 
 
 " 150. Wisconsin 3 00 1,500 
 
 " 151. Wisconsin 3 00 3,500 
 
 " 152. Michigan 2 00 2,200 
 
 - 153. Texas 2 85 2,200 
 
 37 
 
 
 Candle power 
 per hour 
 
 Cost 
 
 )r hour. 
 
 for one cent. 
 
 .066 
 
 307 
 
 .015 
 
 800 
 
 .0178 
 
 1,123 
 
 .021 
 
 571 
 
 .015 
 
 800 
 
 .0272 
 
 441 
 
 .028 
 
 714 
 
 .0168 
 
 1,190 
 
 .0209 
 
 956 
 
 .028 
 
 714 
 
 .0175 
 
 1,142 
 
 .0214 
 
 560 
 
 .024 
 
 833 
 
 .0243 
 
 823 
 
 .02 
 
 1.000 
 
 .03 
 
 666 
 
 .0171 
 
 1,169 
 
 .0205 
 
 585 
 
 .0195 
 
 1,025 
 
 .0416 
 
 480 
 
 .02 
 
 1,000 
 
 .02 
 
 1,000 
 
 .025 
 
 800 
 
 .05 
 
 400 
 
 .0218 
 
 917 
 
 .028 
 
 961 
 
 .0285 
 
 701 
 
 .022 
 
 909 
 
 .025 
 
 800 
 
 .0225 
 
 888 
 
 .02 
 
 600 
 
 .03 
 
 400 
 
 .0175 
 
 685 
 
 .018 
 
 1,111 
 
 .033 
 
 484 
 
 .0179 
 
 670 
 
 .018 
 
 1,111 
 
 .0207 
 
 966 
 
 .0204 
 
 980 
 
 .0333 
 
 600 
 
 .021 
 
 761 
 
 .028 
 
 428 
 
 .0155 
 
 1,290 
 
 .0195 
 
 1,025 
 
 .0212 
 
 943 
 
 .0145 
 
 827 
 
 .0354 
 
 338 
 
 .0348 
 
 574 
 
 .0251 
 
 478 
 
 .0369 
 
 542 
 
 .0228 
 
 526 
 
 .0385 
 
 529 
 
 .0118 
 
 1,111 
 
 .033 
 
 606 
 
 .0366 
 
 336 
 
 .0191 
 
 628 
 
 .0318 
 
 628 
 
 .0318 
 
 377
 
 Candle power 
 
 Cost per Lour 
 
 Private Company. Coal. Hours run. per hour. for one cent. 
 
 No. 154. Pennsylvania.... $ 70 4,000 $.021 952 
 
 " 155. New York 1 56 4,000 .0180 645 
 
 " 156. West Virginia.... 1 50 4,000 .0218 917 
 
 " 157. Pennsylvania.... 100 4,000 .0187 1,069 
 
 " 158. Iowa 1 25 4,000 .02 1,000 
 
 " 159. Indiana N. G. 4,700 .0175 1,142 
 
 " 160. New York 2 90 4,200 .0173 1,150 
 
 " 161. New York 2 45 4,400 .0236 847 
 
 " 162. Wisconsin 4 00 3,000 .028 428 
 
 " 163. North Carolina. . . 3 12 4,000 .0186 645 
 
 " 164. Illinois 2 00 2,200 .0272 785 
 
 " 165. Minnesota 3 55 4,000 .0225 888 
 
 " 166. Wisconsin 2 75 3,000 .0193 621 
 
 " 167. Wisconsin 2 80 1,500- .056 214 
 
 '• 168. Missouri 125 4,000 .02 1.000 
 
 " 169. New York 2 10 4,000 .0227 881 
 
 " 170. Ohio 2 00 2,200 .0329 607 
 
 " 171. New Jersey 3 00 4,000 .025 480 
 
 " 172. New York 2 90 4,200 .02 1,000 
 
 " 173. Colorado... 8 00 4,000 .0252 793 
 
 " 174. Washington 2 50 4,000 .024 833 
 
 " 175. Minnesota w. p. 4,000 .0187 1,069 
 
 " 176. Colorado 8 00 2,200 .0545 366 
 
 " 177. Texas 1 60 3,000 .03 666 
 
 " 178. Colorado 3 50 2,200 .0485 412 
 
 " 179. Utah 2 50 4,200 .0171 1,169 
 
 " 180. Pennsylvania.... 170 4,000 .019 1,052 
 
 " 181. Wisconsin 3 00 4,000 .0237 843 
 
 " 182. Tennessee 2 00 4,500 .0213 938 
 
 " 183. Pennsylvania 1 35 4,000 .0162 1,234 
 
 " 184. Georgia 2 60 2,250 .032 628 
 
 " 185. Ohio 2 10 4,000 .0222 900 
 
 " 186. Alabama 2 20 3,000 .03 666 
 
 " 187. Ohio 2 00 4,000 .0218 917 
 
 " 188. Pennsylvania 2 80 4,000 .0187 641 
 
 " 189. Michigan 150 2,200 .0318 377 
 
 " 190. Connecticut 3 17 4,500 .0266 451 
 
 " 191. Pennsylvania.... 175. 4,000 .0187 1,078 
 
 " 192. Iowa. 2 25 1,800 .036 333 
 
 " 193. Michigan 2 50 4,000 .0145 862 
 
 " 194. Michigan w. p. 1,500 .044 454 
 
 " 195. Pennsylvania.... 140 3,000 .02 1,000 
 
 " 196. Indiana 1 10 4,000 .0187 1,069 
 
 " 197. New Jersey 3 00 4,000 .0246 813 
 
 " 198. New York 3 25 4,500 .0222 540 
 
 " 199. Mississippi 2 95 2.000 .05 500 
 
 " 200. Ohio 2 35 2,300 .0352 568 
 
 " 201. Washington 5 00 3,800 .0263 456 
 
 " 202. Wisconsin 1 25 4,200 .0328 607 
 
 " 203. Iowa 1 40 2,200 .0327 366 
 
 " 204 New York 2 00 2,000 .033 606 
 
 " 205. Minnesota 4 00 2,300 .0365 328 
 
 " 206. Texas 2 50 4,500 .0266 751 
 
 " 207. Delaware 2 45 4,000 .025 800 
 
 " 208. Pennsylvania.... 2 20 3,700 .03 666 
 
 " 209. Pennsylvania 1 05 4,000 .019 1,052 
 
 " 210. Ohio 140 2,800 .0214 934 
 
 " 211. Iowa 1 80 .2,200 .03 400 
 
 38
 
 Private Company. .Coal. 
 
 No. 212. Wisconsiu $ 2 UO 
 
 '' 218. Peuusylvauia n. g. 
 
 " 214. Pennsylvania 85 
 
 " 215. Wisconsin 
 
 " 216. Ohio 1 60 
 
 " 217. Rhode Islaua ... . 31)0 
 
 " 218. Connecticut 4 00 
 
 ♦• 219. New York w. p. 
 
 " 220. Ohio 80 
 
 '• 221. Nebraska 2 55 
 
 ' 222. Ohio 1 40 
 
 
 
 Candle power 
 
 
 Co.st 
 
 per hour 
 
 Hours run. 
 
 per hour. 
 
 for one cent. 
 
 4,000 
 
 $ .02 
 
 1.000 
 
 4,000 
 
 .0218 
 
 550 
 
 4.000 
 
 .016 
 
 1,251 
 
 4,000 
 
 .02 
 
 1,000 
 
 4,000 
 
 .02 
 
 1,000 
 
 1.500 
 
 .05 
 
 240 
 
 4,000 
 
 .025 
 
 480 
 
 4,000 
 
 ,0182 
 
 1.0'.)8 
 
 2,000 
 
 .0367 
 
 544 
 
 1.500 
 
 .08 
 
 250 
 
 2,300 
 
 .0278 
 
 719 
 
 MUNICIPAL PLANTS AND THE COST OF LIGHTS 
 PER HOUR, AND CANDLE POWER PER HOUR 
 FURNISHED FOR ONE CENT. 
 
 In the following table the candle power of lamps and 
 the hours burned are the actual time, in each case, that 
 lights were operated, as shown by the city records. 
 
 Reducing the time in each place to the actual hours 
 lights were burned, and the cost per hour, with the candle 
 power per hour furnished for one cent, places each upon 
 the same basis, and shows the true cost of lights, also the 
 returns cities are receiving for the money paid, and it is 
 immaterial whether they are using 1,200 or 2,000 candle 
 power lamps. 
 
 This is the only true method of comparison. 
 
 Candle power 
 City. Cost Cost per hour 
 
 of coal. Hours run. per hour. for one cent 
 
 Abiogdon, Va S3 00 4,000 $ .027 592 
 
 Ames; la 155 1,500 .0836 239 
 
 Atkin, Minn 2,000 .035 342 
 
 Athens, Ahi 2 00 1.200 .0233 686 
 
 Anderson, Ind n. g. 2,000 .0222 900 
 
 Adrian. Mich 1,500 ,0086 174 
 
 Arlington, Minn 1,200 .0895 134 
 
 Allesheuy.Pa 100 3,976 .0197 1,010 
 
 Aurora, 111 175 2,500 ,031 645 
 
 Ashtabula. Ohio 2 05 2,000 .0568 352 
 
 Alexandria, Va 3,750 .0195 769 
 
 39
 
 Candle power 
 
 City. Cost Cost per hour 
 
 of coal. Hours run. per hour. for one cent. 
 
 Alexandria, Minn 1,500 $.0828 241 
 
 Atlantic, la $150 2,200 .0518 386 
 
 Atlantic Highlands, N.J 2,000 .0375 533 
 
 Bay City, Mich 150 2,000 .0261 766 
 
 Bellevue, Iowa 3,800 ' .0212 566 
 
 Bloomington, 111 195 2,555 . 0366 540 
 
 Bethany, Mo 3 00 2,200 .0397 302 
 
 Belmont, Mass 1,478 .0812 147 
 
 Braintree, Mass 2,300 .039 807 
 
 Batavia, N. Y 177 3,600 .0213 938 
 
 Bangor, Me w. p. 4,000 .0152 789 
 
 Bowling Green, Ky 128 2,200 .0387 516 
 
 Blue Island, 111 1,875 .0451 443 
 
 Carthage, Ohio » 2 00 3,000 .0288 694 
 
 Clyde, Ohio 1 76 1,500 .057 350 
 
 Columbus, Ind 150 2,000 .0334 598 
 
 Catawissa, Pa 100 4,000 .0189 1,058 
 
 Chariton.Ia 125 2.500 .0527 227 
 
 Chicago, 111 2 50 4,000 .0235 851 
 
 Council Grove, Kan 1,875 .0779 154 
 
 Conneaut, Ohio 2,000 .0245 489 
 
 Chambersburg, Pa 4,000 .023 869 
 
 Columbia City, Ind 2 10 3,000 .0339 589 
 
 Chicopee, Mass 3,000 .0365 328 
 
 Decatur, 111 125 2,100 .035 571 
 
 Danvers, Mass 1,742 .032 375 
 
 Danville, Va 4,000 .0155 774 
 
 Dawson, Ga 2 80 2,000 .0464 258 
 
 Dunkirk, N.Y 130 3,000 .0263 760 
 
 Elberton, Ga w. p. 2,000 .035 343 
 
 Elgin, 111 2 00 2,500 .0316 633 
 
 Emons, Pa 2,190 .0511 391 
 
 Estherville, la 2 50 1,500 .0271 443 
 
 Easton, Pa 3,800 .0307 651 
 
 Fremont, Neb 3 35 2,000 .0278 431 
 
 Fayette, Mo 2 00 1,500 .086 333 
 
 Fairfield, la 2 25 1,954 .052 384 
 
 Fulton,Mo 175 3,000 .039 513 
 
 Fort Worth, Tex 3 10 2,000 .0364 329 
 
 Fredonia, N. Y 2 00 1,500 .0384 520 
 
 Frederick, Md 2 50 2,200 .0443 451 
 
 Granville, Ohio 1 25 1,320 .0454 ' 440 
 
 Grandledge, Mich 1, 460 .11 181 
 
 Greenwich, Ohio 135 1,500 .0664 301 
 
 Galveston, Tex 5 00 3,000 .034 588 
 
 Greenfield, Ind 1,500 .05 400 
 
 Griffin, Ga 2,200 .0343 583 
 
 Goshen, Ind 2 95 2,400 .0246 813 
 
 Henderson. Minn 4 00 .0333 240 
 
 Hingham, Mass 1,560 .0479 350 
 
 Hannibal, Mo 155 2,500 .0458 436 
 
 40
 
 City. Cost 
 
 of coal. Hours run. 
 
 Hudson, Mass 1 ,653 
 
 Huntington, lud y.lDO 
 
 Hubbard, Ohio 8 1 65 1,260 
 
 Henderson, Ky 75 2,000 
 
 Hamilton, N. Y 3 10 2,200 
 
 Higprinsville, Mo 180 1,500 
 
 Herriugton, Kan 1,825 
 
 Holland, Mich 2,000 
 
 Herkimer, N. Y 2 50 3,294 
 
 High Point, X.C 4 10 1,500 
 
 Jacksonville, ria 4,000 
 
 Jackson, Ohio 2,000 
 
 Jacksonville, 111 1 74 2,000 
 
 Jamestown, N. Y 1 45 4,000 
 
 Kalamazoo, Mich 2 45 3,000 
 
 Kendallville, Ind 2 25 2,000 
 
 Lowell, Mich w. p. 1,500 
 
 Lisbon. la 2 50 1,500 
 
 Logausport, lud n. g. 4,000 
 
 Lewiston, Me w. p. 4,000 
 
 Lansing, Mich 2 25 4,000 
 
 Miamisburg, Ohio 1 72 2,000 
 
 Marseilles, 111 w. p. 3,500 
 
 Montpelier, Ohio 2 50 1,500 
 
 Mattoon, 111 75 2,000 
 
 Mishawaska, Ind 1 98 2,200 
 
 Muncie Ind 2 65 3,200 
 
 Meadville, Pa 2 16 3,500 
 
 Marietta, Ohio N. G. 4,0i)0 
 
 Martin's Ferry, Ohio 61 3,000 
 
 Marshall, Mich w. p. 2,000 
 
 Mount Pleasant, la 1 95 2,000 
 
 Marblehead, Mass S.OOO 
 
 Middleborough, Mass 1,272 
 
 Madisonville, Ohio 185 1,500 
 
 Marion, Ind n. g. 2,000 
 
 Morgan Park. 111. 1 85 1,400 
 
 Marquette, Mich w. p. 4,000 
 
 Morrisville, Vt w. p. 1,500 
 
 North East, Pa 195 1,500 
 
 Newbury, S. C 3 35 2,000 
 
 Ortonville, Minn 6 00 2,000 
 
 Ovid, Mich 2 06 1 ,500 
 
 Osage City, Kan 1 90 1 ,500 
 
 Oxford, Ohio 2 60 1,500 
 
 Painesville, Ohio 2 15 2,000 
 
 Portland, Mich w. p. 1,500 
 
 Paducah, Ky 1 00 3,000 
 
 Paris, 111 2 25 3,000 
 
 Paw Paw, Mich w. p. 1,400 
 
 Plain City, Ohio 2 00 1,500 
 
 41 
 
 Candle power 
 
 Cost 
 
 per hour 
 
 per hour. 
 
 for one con 
 
 .0799 
 
 250 
 
 ; .0491 
 
 408 
 
 .038 
 
 526 
 
 .0311 
 
 643 
 
 .044 
 
 272 
 
 .0444 
 
 270 
 
 .14 
 
 136 
 
 .0416 
 
 480 
 
 .0256 
 
 7^1 
 
 .0302 
 
 397 
 
 .0233 
 
 858 
 
 .0375 
 
 533 
 
 .027 
 
 740 
 
 .0229 
 
 524 
 
 .0295 
 
 077 
 
 .022 
 
 909 
 
 .043 
 
 431 
 
 .032 
 
 625 
 
 .024 
 
 833 
 
 .0178 
 
 674 
 
 .0253 
 
 790 
 
 .0395 
 
 506 
 
 .0148 
 
 1,351 
 
 .0465 
 
 430 
 
 .0297 
 
 673 
 
 .05 
 
 400 
 
 .0209 
 
 956 
 
 .02 
 
 1,000 
 
 .0213 
 
 938 
 
 .0285 
 
 701 
 
 .0404 
 
 495 
 
 .0161 
 
 496 
 
 .0229 
 
 089 
 
 .08 
 
 150 
 
 .0378 
 
 317 
 
 .0281 
 
 711 
 
 .03 
 
 666 
 
 .0263 
 
 700 
 
 .0809 
 
 247 
 
 .04 
 
 500 
 
 .035 
 
 571 
 
 .0092 
 
 289 
 
 .0688 
 
 290 
 
 .0355 
 
 563 
 
 .051 
 
 392 
 
 .0353 
 
 566 
 
 .03 
 
 400 
 
 .0316 
 
 632 
 
 .0173 
 
 693 
 
 .0289 
 
 553 
 
 .0422 
 
 473
 
 City. Cost 
 
 of coal. Hours run. 
 
 Pawnee City, Neb $3 25 1,500 
 
 Quitman, Ga 150 2,000 
 
 Quakertown, Pa 3 10 3,000 
 
 Eock Falls, 111 3,000 
 
 Eochelle, 111 3 15 1,200 
 
 Beading, Mass 3,533 
 
 Rensselaer, Ind 1 95 3, 000 
 
 Rnshville, Ind 3,190 
 
 St. Clair, Pa 100 2,000 
 
 South Boston, Va 1,500 
 
 Salem, Va 81 1,500 
 
 St. Peters, Minn 3 15 1,500 
 
 Sherman. Tex 2 50 4,000 
 
 Springville, N. Y w. p. 4,000 
 
 Shelby, Ohio 1 85 2.000 
 
 Statesville, N. C 150 2,000 
 
 Somerville, Tenn 2 65 1,500 
 
 St. Charles, Mo 185 2,000 
 
 South Norwalk, Conn 1,900 
 
 Stanton, 111 58 2,000 
 
 Smyrna, Del 2 35 2,300 
 
 Shelby, Mich 2 10 1,500 
 
 Shickshinny, Pa 85 2,200 
 
 Santa Clara, Cal 3 30 1,200 
 
 St. Joseph, Mo 1 20 2,200 
 
 Swanton, Vt w, p. 3,000 
 
 Salem, 111 150 i,500 
 
 Santa Cruz, Cal 1,500 
 
 Taunton. Mass 2,144 
 
 Titusville. Pa n. g. 3,500 
 
 Topeka, Kan 3 00 3,000 
 
 Tarentum, Pa 150 4,000 
 
 Vinton, la 188 1,800 
 
 Wheeling, W. Va 1 09 4,000 
 
 Westfield, N. Y 2 10 3,120 
 
 Waseca, Minn 3 85 1,500 
 
 Wakefield, Mass 1,365 
 
 Williston, Ohio 80 3, 000 
 
 Winterset, la 1,400 
 
 Watervliet, N. Y ' 4,000 
 
 Ypsilanti, Mich w. p. 1,900 
 
 
 Candle power 
 
 Cost 
 
 per hour 
 
 per hour. 
 
 for one cent. 
 
 ; .0543 
 
 368 
 
 .0484 
 
 413 
 
 .035 
 
 47a 
 
 .0416 
 
 480 
 
 .0416 
 
 480 
 
 .0354 
 
 338 
 
 .0443 
 
 2"70 
 
 .0750 
 
 366 
 
 .0365 
 
 563 
 
 .0467 
 
 256 
 
 .0376 
 
 31» 
 
 .0476 
 
 420 
 
 .0311 
 
 948 
 
 .0155 
 
 1,390 
 
 .0409 
 
 488 
 
 .0466 
 
 257 
 
 .0438 
 
 456 
 
 .0393 
 
 508 
 
 .0476 
 
 394 
 
 .034 
 
 588 
 
 .043 
 
 283 
 
 .0333 
 
 360' 
 
 .035 
 
 571 
 
 .0549 
 
 364 
 
 .039 
 
 513 
 
 .058 
 
 344 
 
 .0393 
 
 682 
 
 .0733 
 
 373 
 
 .034 
 
 353 
 
 .0157 
 
 1,273 
 
 .0335 
 
 597 
 
 .0239 
 
 502 
 
 .0286 
 
 409 
 
 .0225 
 
 80O 
 
 .0164 
 
 1,219 
 
 .0507 
 
 394 
 
 .06 
 
 200 
 
 .0318 
 
 377 
 
 .0335 
 
 358 
 
 .0247 
 
 809 
 
 .0273 
 
 733 
 
 42
 
 CORRECT COMPARISON OF LIGHTS. 
 
 The cost per year of a lamp is not a correct or proper 
 basis for ascertaining the cost of lights. 
 
 The fact that the yearly cost of a lamp is low is no 
 criterion that the light is cheap. 
 
 One plant may burn a 1,200 candle power lamp a few 
 hours per night during certain nights each month, while 
 another plant burns a 2,000 candle power lamp all night 
 every night. 
 
 As an illustration, compare Hubbard, Ohio, where the 
 yearly cost is S48 per lamp, but they were burned only 
 1,260 hours per year, and when the cost per hour is 
 calculated it is .038 cents per hour, and the candle power 
 per hour furnished for one cent is 526, while at Chambers- 
 burg, Pa., the annual cost is S92, but the lights are burned 
 4,000 hours per year, and the cost per hour is only .023 
 cents, and the candle power per hour furnished for one 
 cent is 869, showing that, notwithstanding the. annual 
 rate at Chambersburg is nearly twice as much as at Hub- 
 bard, the cost per hour is .015 cents less, and they furnish 
 343 more candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 AVERAGE COST IN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PLANTS. 
 
 An examination of the reports discloses the fact that 
 private companies, on an average, furnish the lights for 
 3,380 hours per year, while the municipal plants average 
 2,307 hours per year. 
 
 Showing that the private companies furnish the lights 
 for 1,073 more hours per year than the municipal plants. 
 
 The cost per hour in the municipal plants average 
 
 43
 
 .0397 cents per hour, and with private companies cost is 
 .0264 cents per hour, being .0133 cents per hour less. 
 
 Also, that private companies furnish, on an average, 
 750 candle power per hour for one cent, and the munici- 
 pal plants 528 candle power per hour for one cent. There- 
 fore, municipalities, who contract with private companies, 
 receive 222 more candle power per hour for one cent than 
 is produced in the municipal plants. 
 
 COST WHEN TRUE ACCOUNTS ARE RENDERED. 
 
 Scores of statements have been made by the advo- 
 cates of municipal ownership, showing that the total 
 cost, in certain cities, of an arc light, where city owned 
 the plant, was from $25 to $50 per year. 
 
 Yet, when the gas and electric light commissioners of 
 Massachusetts, who are furnished with sworn statements 
 of the municipal plants, and then send an expert to ex- 
 amine their books and verify the costs, and find that the 
 average, of all the municipal plants in the state using 
 1,200 candle power arc lights, is $99.45, only burned 
 2,148 hours per year. How are these advocates of mu- 
 nicipal ownership to explain the reason for this great 
 difference in the cost in Massachusetts and the plants 
 which they quote. Of course, there can be but one rea- 
 son. given in Massachusetts, the true facts and actual cost 
 is shown, while in the cases repoited by these advocl-tes 
 in other cities, they simply give a part of the operating 
 expenses, and the rest are charged to other departments, 
 and interest, depreciation, taxes, and sinking fund, are 
 entirely ignored, as is shown in the report of Chief 
 Walker of Philadelphia, when he reported cost of opera- 
 ting a municipal plant : 
 
 Made no charge for the services of a superintendent. 
 
 44
 
 No provision for a machinist. 
 No charge for the removal of ashes. 
 No charge in the cost of maintenance for repairs to 
 engines, boilers, dynamos, lamps, etc. 
 
 No charge for the use of a horse and wagon. 
 
 No provision for insurance. 
 
 No charge for water that would be consumed. 
 
 No provision for repairs to real estate. 
 
 No charge for lost taxes. 
 
 No charge for interest. 
 
 AN ECONOMIC TRUTH. 
 
 In the reports made of all municipal plants in Mass- 
 achusetts, the cost per lamp per year, hours burned, 
 candle power, interest, depreciation, etc., are taken from 
 the report of the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners, 
 and made up by the commission. Therefore, there can 
 be no question as to their accuracy. 
 
 In Massachusetts, the real condition and results are 
 shown, and all the facts revealed, and the commissioners of 
 the state vouch for their truthfulness. The municipal 
 plants in that state are as well equipped as any in the 
 country, and can produce the lights at as low a rate as 
 any. If the taxes were added, it would make a still more 
 unfavorable showing for the municipal plants. That the 
 economic truth involved in this condition of municipal 
 ownership is beginning to be recognized and understood 
 S3ems to be indicated by the adverse action taken during 
 the past year by tax payers in a number of Massachusetts 
 towns. 
 
 45
 
 COMPARATIVE COST OF INCANDESCENTS, AS 
 SHOWN BY MASSACHUSETTS REPORTS. 
 
 The Massachusetts Gas and Electric Light Commis- 
 sioners' report shows that the cost per year of 25 candle 
 power street incandescent lamps was $14.75, for one town 
 $22.88, for two others, $25.62 and $30.28, respectively. 
 The same report shows that private companies are charg- 
 ing for the same class of lamps from $12 to $16 per year. 
 
 These figures for municipal plants do not include 
 taxes, if they were added it would make the comparison 
 still more unfavorable. One would expect as good results 
 in Massachusetts as in any state, but the result shows that 
 the cost of public lighting exceeds what it would be under 
 private ownership. 
 
 The same report' shows that the operating expenses 
 for 1899 of the municipal electric plants were $14,190.75 
 more than they were the year previous, while the receipts 
 only increased $7,103.24. 
 
 Be]jnont burned 25 candle power incandescents 5.5 
 hours per night for 22.4 nights per month, at a cost of 
 $30.28 per year per lamp, and charged private parties 
 20 cents per kilowatt for incandescents, and customers pay 
 for renewals. 
 
 Braintree burned 25 candle power incandescents 7.7 
 hours per night for 24.8 nights per month, at a cost of 
 $22.48 per lamp per year, and charge to private customers 
 for incandescent lights was 6 mills per ampere hour. 
 Customers pay for renewals. 
 
 Hudson burned 25 candle power incandescents 4.8 
 hours per night for 28.7 nights per month, at a cost of 
 $22.88 per year, and charged for incandescent lights 20 
 cents per kilowatt. Customers pay for renewals. 
 
 Middleborough burned 25 candle power incandescents 
 4.4 hours per night for 24.1 nights per month, at a cost of 
 $25.62 per, year per lamp, and charge to private customers 
 was 15 cents per kilowatt. Customers pay 25 per cent 
 above cost for renewals. 
 
 46
 
 EXPERIENCE OF MUNICIPALITIES WHO OWN 
 PLANTS. 
 
 MUNCIE, Ind. The superintendent saiys that as a general rule they 
 are unsatisfactorj'. 
 
 METROPOLIS, 111. Superintendent says municipal plants are not 
 as economical as thej- should be and are not managed as they should be. 
 It seems as though there is no one to go ahead and carry out things. 
 
 HERRINGTON, Kan. Superintendent says a good man cannot do 
 much in ii year. 
 
 WELLS, Minn. Superintendent says : I do not believe in muni- 
 cipal ownership of electric plants, as too much political influence is 
 brought to bear on it, and the plant suffers from it both as to manage- 
 ment and economy. 
 
 HOLLAND, Mich. President says : I am inclined to the opinion 
 that there would be a chance for corruption and appointment of favorites 
 and for political iutiuence. 
 
 JACKSON, Ohio. Superintendent says : This plant is run bj' a 
 committee from the council which is changed every 3'ear, so we get new 
 management every year that does not become acquainted with the work 
 until changed ; the attention is not paid to details as would be by a 
 private company. 
 
 OXFORD, Ohio. City trustee says : We believe that they can be 
 operated in towns saj' of 3,000 people, but not in larger on account of 
 political aftairs being so often mixed up with them. 
 
 DeGRAFF, Ohio. Manager says: A committee of the council 
 in nine cases out of ten will put their judgment up against a man of years 
 of experience in the management of plants. 
 
 WILMINGTON, Ohio. Superintendent saj-s : In my experience 
 no plant should be run l)y any municipal corporation, for there are so 
 many that want to.be boss, and too manj- free lights. 
 
 GRAND HAVEN, Mich. The board and council have quarreled 
 over the city electrician, who has resigned ; the board accuses the 
 council of desiring to put men in charge of the electric light plant who 
 are related to certain aldermen. The council accuses the board of 
 creating liabilitj' without reference to the city council, and have ordered 
 the treasurer to pay no bills unless approved by the council. 
 
 dUAKERTOWN, Pa. Superintendent saj-s municipal electric 
 plants would be a success if politics could be kept away from them. 
 
 47
 
 An official of 
 
 C0NNEAT7T, Ohio, sa3'S : "When some saloon keeper, shoemaker 
 or baker, who, by his affiliation with some organization, is elected to 
 office and is allowed to manage an electric light plant, municipal owner- 
 ship can hardly help being a failure. All the conditions are unfavorable, 
 owing to the miserable political system of the country. 
 
 One of the officials of 
 
 GOODLAND, Ind., writes: Dear Sir: This is a municipal light- 
 ing plant, and having to pass each year from bad hajids to worse in the 
 matter of trustees, the plant has never paid a dollar, but is running in 
 debt constantly, as nearly every such plant is doing. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 Dear Sir : 
 
 I have just taken charge of the plant here, and they hav'n't taken 
 record of anything, run it just as they could. The engineer let things 
 run down so that they were just about ready to shut down. I have been 
 working at it day and night, got it so it runs very well now. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 Dear Sir : 
 
 The mayor and all councilmen, city clerk and all citizens of the city 
 try to run the plant. The water works and electric lights are run 
 together. As the mayor and committee, with the assistance of a leather- 
 headed clerk, all dictate what shall be done and where supplies shall be 
 bought, I, therefore, have no report to make. With eight years' experi- 
 ence, I would advise all towns to hire their lights, which is by far the 
 cheapest. I am not in favor of any city or town owning an electric light 
 plant. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 CHARLOTTE, N. Y. , has a municipal plant. George W. Euggles,^ 
 ex-president of the village, and a trustee for many years, says : "Muni- 
 cipal affairs here are in a terrible condition. The water works and 
 electric light plants have been terribly mismanaged by village officials. 
 I do not think the water system will be a success. We will not get any 
 water from it. If we do, the supply will be very scant, and will be 
 polluted by drainage from Greenleaf's farm barn-yards and outhouses, 
 and the filth from the power house. Even if enough water should run 
 into the receiving pipes, it would be contaminated by the sewage carried 
 down the river from the city of Rochester. The substance of the whole 
 matter is that we have expended more than $75,000 for village improve- 
 ments, electric light, water works and sewer. We have a sewer, which is 
 of no use without water works. We have no water, and are not likely to 
 get any, and we have a few feeble electric lights. Last night, one of the 
 brick arches under the boiler in the power house, for the second time^ 
 caved in, and nearly all the town was in darkness." 
 
 48
 
 MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT. 
 
 NEWARK, Ohio, has a plant, and at a meeting of the city council 
 the president said : " They were having the worst service in the history 
 of the plant. Several men were employed therein whose habits were so 
 bad that for several days following each pay-day they were incapacitated 
 for good performance of their duties. Many lamps throughout the city 
 gave no light, because they were carelessly or improperly handled, and 
 the time was not far distant when the city must incur a heavy expense to 
 put the plant in shape." The Newark, Ohio, American says: " If the 
 city authorities have in vievr the utter and complete destruction of our 
 electric light plant, they are certainly pursuing the right course to 
 accomplish that end." 
 
 WYANDOTTE, Mich. At a council meeting, charges were freely 
 made against members of the board and the employes of the lighting 
 plant. The mayor stated : " That accidents had occurred to the public 
 lighting plant of the city in the last few months, and charges had been 
 made by numerous citizens as to extravagance, incompetence and flagrant 
 neglect on the part of employes. These had become so fre(iuent that he 
 had hardly been able to attend to business on account of such complaints. 
 Also, the operation of the plant was becoming more and more costly each 
 month." 
 
 ONAWA, Iowa, has a municipal plant, and for the past eight years 
 the service has been very poor, resulting in many business men putting 
 in i:)lants of their own. The council claims that the management is to 
 blame, and the management say the council interferes with the business, 
 and so it goes. No head, and a lot of politicians running the business, 
 and the tax payers paying for the loss sustained. 
 
 GRAND HAVEN, Mich. The city has been operating its electric 
 light plant under the control of the board of public works, subject to the 
 approval of the council. The board and council have quarreled over the 
 city electrician, Avho has resigned. Another was elected. The board 
 accuses the council of desiring to put men in charge of the electric light 
 plant who are related to certain aldermen. The council accuse the board 
 of trying to create liability without reference to the council, and have 
 instructed the city treasurer to paj'^ no bills not approved by the council. 
 Meantime, the spring elections are anticipated, and. merry times are 
 promised. 
 
 49 
 
 (4)
 
 FACTS DISCLOSED BY CITY OFFICIALS. 
 
 The following extract from the report of the chairman 
 of the electric lighting committee of the city of Memphis, 
 Tenn., who were negotiating and made a contract with 
 the local comipany for 35 years, discloses some pertinent 
 truths regarding municipal ownership : 
 
 In pursuing my investigations concerning this subject, I did not over- 
 look cities owning electrical plants, on the other hand I did my utmost to 
 obtain from such cities full and true reports relative to the actual cost of 
 both arc and incandescent lighting, some of them replied, but the 
 majority failed to furnish me with the desired information. 
 
 Those who did favor me, I regret to say, did so with reports that, 
 upon outside investigation and from expert testimony, I find are totally 
 unreliable, failing to give the true costs, merely publishing what I would 
 term " political" figures. 
 
 For instance, the last published cost of an arc light in Allegheny, 
 Pa., was $47.35 per annum, which was really the cash cost, making no 
 allowance for interest, depreciation, taxes lost, or water consumed. 
 However, in their annual report of bureau of lighting of 1900, they tell 
 the public that, after allowing four per cent interest, five per cent depre- 
 ciation, and a certain amount for taxes, their arc lights cost them $71.17, 
 which is in itself, according to other statistics, too low. They give their 
 depreciation at five per cent., or $12.04 per arc lamp, when, as a matter of 
 fact, and upon investigations made by a committee appointed by congress 
 and ten different cities, the actual depreciation should be ten per cent. , 
 or, instead of charging $12.04 per lamp, the city of Allegheny should 
 charge $24.08, and publish its cost per arc lamp per annum at $83.21. 
 Even this figure is disputed, experts claiming it too low. 
 
 The city of Chicago reports its cost per arc lamp per annum at $55.93, 
 and admits no interest is charged on plant. 
 
 It might as well admit several other things which it does not. for the 
 management of this concern has been anything but creditable to the city of 
 Chicago, and the facts in the case are that when the lights are charged 
 properly, and without any subterfuge being resorted to, the cost will be 
 seen to be nearer $150 per annum per light than what is published. 
 
 It is a very significant condition of affairs when a city publishes 
 $55.93 per arc light, then immediately after lets a contract for over 500 
 lights at $103, under the excuse that they do it rather than increase their 
 present plant. It seems to me that, if they can produce lights as cheap 
 
 60
 
 as cliiimed, they would certainly build a uew or exteud tlu' old plant, 
 when they can save :J47.07 per arc lamp per j'ear. 
 
 The city of Detroit owns its own plant, and is considered the best 
 lij^hted citj' in America, and, from accounts, a very dearly lighted one. 
 In various publications I Hud their cost given at *4(j.40 j)er arc lamp per 
 annum, when they admit in their own report that, allowins: only a threev 
 per cent dei)reciation, their arc lumps actually- cost them 8'<'''J.5G per 
 annum. With proper charge for depreciation of ten jier cent, etc., it will 
 be found that Detroit lights actually cost them 8102.30 per annum, 
 taking the figures of e.xperts. 
 
 The few other municipal plants that I could learn anj'thing about 
 ran their electric plants in conutection with other municipal iilants, and 
 were either unable to furnish me with information desired or were 
 unwilling to do so. Some few ran them in connection with water works, 
 and hardly knew themselves what it cost them. From various publica- 
 titms I find (piite a number of municipal plants in diftereut cities con- 
 ducted on the lines already' referred to, and their lights costing them, in 
 each instance, except where operated by water power or located in a 
 much smaller city than ours, if anything, more than we pay at present 
 for our arc lights. 
 
 MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP PREVENTS IMPROVE- 
 MENTS. 
 
 An es.say upon municipal ownership, by Wm. A. 
 Lynch of Ohio, is so pertinent, and treats the subject so 
 ably and thorou^jhly, that we quote portions of the article. 
 
 IS THERE A NEED OF CH.\NGE OF SYSTEM? 
 
 The discussions to-daj' range largely around the matters of public 
 light works and street railways. 
 
 By far the major of these are owned by private companies, under 
 legal restrictions of state and municipal control. May it not be well to 
 iu(iuire for a moment into the manner in which these companies have 
 performed their duties, say, for the last twenty years? Will anj'one 
 deny that in that period the public lighting service has been vastlj' im- 
 proved in character, and for each dollar paid the public receives vastly 
 more in return than in 1H80? Has any i)ublic service been better ren- 
 dered, or more greatly imi)roved, than that of public lighting in the 
 period referred to ? 
 
 And how is it as to street railways? In the short space of twelve 
 years or so a complete revolution has been ati'eeted in our street railway 
 transportation. At enormous cost, with prodigious energy and large 
 
 51
 
 sacrifice, tlie old horse car street railway' system has passed away and the 
 new, the bright, the efficient electric system has taken its place. 
 
 It should not be forgotten that these vast improvements in light- 
 ing and transportation have been effected by private enterprise and pri- 
 vate capital, working through private corporations. 
 
 The electric railway has cheapened the cost of service equally with 
 the electric light, for while the nickel still remains the standard charge, 
 yet by the lengthening of the lines, pushing them out into the suburbs, 
 consolidating them, transferring from line to line, a lengthened ride, a 
 quicker one, and a vastly pleasanter one, has been ofi"ered to the public 
 without increase of fare. 
 
 In less than a quarter of a century a great revolution has been 
 wrought. Great problems have been attacked, immense difficulties have 
 been overcome and large successes achieved. I doubt if in the history 
 of the world greater improvements of a practical kind have been worked 
 out and accomplished, in so short a time, as we have seen in this country 
 in respect to the public improvements to which I have referred. I desire 
 to say now, with all possible seriousness and emphasis, that these im- 
 provements have been due to the fact, above all others, that these pub- 
 lic services have been intrusted to private enterprise, working their pri- 
 vate capital, and that under no other system could they have been 
 brought about. 
 
 I think this is a point worthy of more careful thought. Suppose 
 that the system which is now strenuously proposed, viz. , the municipal 
 ownership and control of these services had been established fifty years 
 ago, and all the gas works, street railway's and the like, had been owned 
 by the cities and towns. What would have been the fate of the electric 
 light, and where, to-day, would be the electric railway? 
 
 What made the electric light possible ? When the first dynamo was 
 produced, about 1866, affording the first means which had been devel- 
 oped for the cheap generation of electricity, eager minds turned at once 
 to apply it to the generation of light and power for practical purposes. 
 The thought was simple enough, the thing was a world of difficulties. 
 Years of experiment in the field of actual use were necessary to bring 
 success. The enterprise of private companies, acting upon competitive 
 lines, furnished the field. Gas-producing interests stood solidly in- 
 trenched against the newcomer, but being virtually all in the hands of 
 private capital, other capital took up the cause of the electric light, 
 introduced it, worked with it, improved it and made it a success, and 
 then pushed it with an aggressive earnestness without parallel in the 
 history of business enterprise. W^hat would have been the result, what 
 chance would the electric light have had of introduction, experiment, 
 development or success, if all the gas works of the country at that time 
 had been owned by the municipalities ? Competition would have been 
 impossible. The entering wedge could not have been inserted, much less 
 driven home. There would have been no inducement to taxpayers to 
 have taken up the new bantling, and fought its battles for it against 
 their own interests, 
 
 52
 
 The city of Wheeling is referred to as perhaps the most marked 
 example of successful muuicipal management of gasworks. Cheap and 
 abundant coal near at hand and a well- selected l)oard of trustees 
 resulted in producing cheap gas. \yhen the electric light knocked at its 
 portals, it received no recognition. Wheeling did not have an electric 
 light on its streets until all other towns in the United States of two 
 thousand population, and many below that size, had their streets well 
 lighted by the electric light. The city's large investment in its gas 
 plant was sufticient argument against the admission of a competitor, and 
 when some of its enterprising citizens built a small incandescent plant 
 for private lighting, and started to make their waj' from block to block, 
 the}' at first found it necessary to cross a street by drawing the wires 
 through a pipe laid for the ostensible purpose of conveying water. Had 
 all the cities owned their gas works, had the system of municipal owner- 
 ship generally prevailed, it is safe to say that the immense improvement 
 made in street lighting bj- the electric light would not have come in our 
 time. 
 
 The indisposition of municipal authorities toward the prompt intro- 
 duction of large improvements would have manifested itself in respect 
 to street railwaj-s if the^' had been owned bj' the municipalities instead 
 of private companies. Has anyone slop))ed to consider the enormous 
 increase of investment which the change from the horse railway to the 
 electric railway has called for ? Would the cities have managed the 
 numberless experiments, overcome the enorrcous difficulties and care- 
 full}-, patiently worked out problems involved in this change ? 
 
 HOW ABOrT THE FUTURE ? 
 
 But it may be said, fortunately for us, the cities generally did not 
 own the gas works or the railroads — the field was open for private capi- 
 tal to accomplish these results, but now that they have been accom- 
 plished, it is time for the city to enter the field and reap the harvest. 
 We will now permit the city to build 'its light plant and enter into com- 
 petition with the private company which has helped to make the electric 
 light possible. If it is in our waj' we will destroj' it, b}^ furnishing the 
 light at a diminished price, for we have an inexaustible fund upon which 
 to draw, viz., the resources of the taxpayer, which thecompauj^ does not 
 possess. The company, therefore, must submit to be ruined, or turn 
 over to the cit}' its plant at a price which will represent the cost of 
 reproduction, without allowance for the value of its franchise, its earn- 
 ing power or its good will, to say nothing of compensation for its sacri- 
 fices and losses made in the earlier portion of its history. 
 
 If this position is just, is it safe 'i Is it prudent to assume that there 
 are to be no improvements in the future ? All improvements in the past 
 have been made at the expense of the private capital which had been 
 invested before the introduction of the improvement. Has the inventive 
 faculty of man exhausted itself? Is the electric light of to-daj' the end 
 of improvement? If the municii>alities of Ohio now build up, at large 
 expense, electric lighting plants on the most approved lines of the pres-
 
 ent, have we any assurance that they may not in the future be wipecl out, 
 or be made vastly less valuable by the inventions and improvements of 
 the future ? 
 
 AXOTHEK ASPECT OF FUTURE lilPEOVEMENT. 
 
 I have been pointing out that under the plan of municipal owner- 
 ship, the municipal investment must run the risk of new improvements 
 in plant or process — but there is another more important aspect in this 
 question of future improvements. The public want the improvements — 
 they get the benefit of them ; it gives them a better light, a better ser- 
 vice. With all the instiiimentalities of generating light, transporting 
 people and performing the other public services in the hands of the 
 municipality, [the introduction of improvements will be discouraged. 
 To-day it is encouraged by the reason of the competition offered by 
 those who are serving the public or are desirous of serving it. Take 
 light again, for instance. When the electric light threatened to over- 
 whelm gas investments with destruction, new processes in gasmaking 
 were introduced which cheapened the gas, diminished the price to the 
 consumer, and sustained the gas companies. And now, with the intro- 
 duction of the Welsbach and other improved burners, gas is closely 
 pressing the electric light ; the price of both to the consumer is falling 
 and the service of each improved, and within the past year both these 
 lights are meeting sharp competition from the incandescent vapor lights 
 of various kinds. But with all the light works in the hands of the 
 municipalities, the motive for this constant striiggle for improvement, 
 this competition for public favor and patronage would be wholly de- 
 stroyed. 
 
 THE QUESTION OF COST. 
 
 If the cities of Ohio generally enter upon the plan of owning their 
 own lighting plants and operating them, the works will not be generally 
 as well managed, and the cost to the consumer and taxpayer united will 
 not be as small as though that service were left with private companies, 
 under proper public regulations. This, to my mind, covers the whole 
 question of cost. It is useless to cite "isolated cases of a city here or 
 there that has been fortunate enough in its management for a year or so 
 to enable it to produce a cheap electric light. That all goes for nothing. 
 What would the system of municipal ownership as a system result in, if 
 generally introduced ? Judge from the management of municipal affairs 
 in other departments. There could be but one result ; it would be more 
 costly in the long run, taking a term of years together. 
 
 ILIi EFFECTS OF CHANGES OF MANAGEMENT. 
 
 If lighting plants and street railways were generally owned by the 
 cities, a serious drawback would be felt in frequent changes of manage- 
 ment that^would likely.follow. These plants are much more complicated, 
 employ more labor, require more technical skill than water works, and 
 call for consistent plans patiently worked out to give them any show of 
 success. 
 
 54
 
 THE INTERESTS OF LAROR. 
 
 When we consider the rifrhts of the men who operate these works, 
 another question arises. Private companies make it a special point to 
 retain the services of competent men as k)n<< as they faithfully perform 
 their duties. Under municipal ownership they might find their tenure of 
 place very uncertain as the spring election approaches, and all the evils 
 of the spoils system, with its hardships and injustice, might be appre- 
 hended. It certainly would be a most unsatisfactory system of employ- 
 ment if the places of the men depended upon the i-esult oi an election, 
 as would undoubtedly be the case under a general sj^stem of municipal 
 ownership. 
 
 EFFECTS UPON OUR POIilTICAIi INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 Every patriotic citizen should feel that there are considerations 
 deeper than those springing from dollars and cents. Every important 
 change ])roposed in our public affairs must be challenged as to its proba- 
 ble effect upon the public welfare. It seems to be generally conceded 
 that the crying evil of municipal management, especially in our larger 
 cities, is bossism. Bossism feeds upon patronage. Municipal owner- 
 ship carried to the full would enormously increase patronage. Would it 
 not increase m equal degree the opportunities and power of the boss ^ I 
 cannot say, as in my little city we have no bosses. It is claimed that 
 municipal ownership would purify our politics and destroy the power of 
 the i)olitical boss. It is said that the public conscience would be quick- 
 ened and the enlightened attention of the citizens would be turned upon 
 these matters, and that an exalted civil service will be established for the 
 selection and employment of all public servants. 
 
 Past experience has not largely justified this claim. If the people 
 of our large cities are willing to leave the immense concerns of the mu- 
 nicipality to the bosses, and to bear the heavy burdens of constantly in- 
 creasing taxation, with but spasmodic protests, is it likely that the addi- 
 tion of a lighting plant would work regeneration ? Philadelphia's own- 
 ership of its gasworks did not seem to have that effect. 
 
 In the present state of the development of the race we must regard 
 these sounding claims of the municipal reformer as decidedlj' chimerical. 
 A reform which depends for success upon amaterial change in human na- 
 ture has little to recommend it. Practical minds, who have had some- 
 thing to do with afiairs, are disposed to judge of the future somewhat 
 from the experience of the past. 
 
 00
 
 THE BASIS OF MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP. 
 
 The Electrical Review says : 
 
 The whole matter seems, in a way, too simple for elaborate discus- 
 sion. The mianicipalitj' has no right to tax its citizens save for their 
 own benefit. It is conceded by all people that the maintenance of such 
 institutions as the necessary courts of justice, the machinery of admin- 
 istration, the protection of life and property by police and fire depart- 
 ments, the maintenance of sanitary conditions, etc., are things which all 
 citizens are directly and vitally interested and for which it is proper that 
 every person living within the scope of the municipal government should 
 be required to pay his proportionate part. This elementary principle of 
 justice can not, however, be made to include those services which supply 
 only a part of the citizens and not all. For example, the distribution of 
 water, which is a commodity needed by every person, as well as by the 
 community at large for the protection against fire and' sanitary purposes, 
 is fitly within the province of the municipality. The distribution of gas 
 or electricity for lighting is not an essential, except in so far as it relates 
 to lighting streets and public places. If a municipality undertakes to 
 supply the consumers with electric light it enters into one or the other 
 of three things, which are easily proved to be inequitaT[)le : If the plant 
 is operated at a loss, the taxpayers as a. body miist make up the de- 
 ficit for the benefit of the individuals who use light. If it is operated 
 at a profit, the individuals who use light must pay the profit to the 
 relief of the body of taxpayers, who would otherwise be called upon 
 to provide the increased income. If it is run at neither a profit nor 
 a loss, then the municipal government is gratuitously undertaking 
 the burden and responsibility of a business which is not profitable 
 to it and which, by extinguishing the opportunity for competition, 
 deprives its citizens of a certain just and natural right to buy in 
 the cheapest market the coynmodity that they need. 
 
 This, it seems, is the common sense of the municipal ownership sit- 
 uation. It is of interest to observe the change in opinion which is grad- 
 ually coming over the public in Great Britain, where for years the muni- 
 cipal operation of such public services has obtained. While these have 
 been admirably conducted from the point of view of economical administra- 
 tion and upright and honest management, they have failed to satisfy the 
 public, and there is a constantly increasing demand for the chartering 
 of private concerns to engage in the same lines of work. In other 
 Avords, even in the oldest and most conservative community in which 
 municipal ownership has had a fair trial, it has proved itself a failure. 
 It seems strange, therefore, that such a thing should be advocated in 
 this country, and doubtless the reason for its warm championship is often 
 to be found in political aspirations on the part of self-seeking members 
 of municipal governments.
 
 AN ADVOCATE OF MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP 
 
 Has famished whut he calls a list of the municipal plauts in each 
 «tate. An examination of this list discloses the fact that there are quite 
 a large number of cities which he reports as havinoj municipal plants 
 who are furnished by private companies under contract, and, by his 
 list, there are only o7 plants in the entire United States in places large 
 enough so that the business to be obtained would properly support a 
 private plant ; all the others are in small cities or villages, where they 
 were compelled to adopt municipal ownership in order to secure electric 
 lights. The list shows that in 1892 there were 25 municipal plants estab- 
 lished ; in 1893, 15 ; in 1894, nine ; in 1895, ten ; in 189G, seven ; and in 
 1898, only b ; thus showing a steady decrease ; and indicate that when 
 tax payers began to tind out the fallacj- of the statements of advocates of 
 municipal ownership, and the true fact as to the cost of such plants, they 
 refused to be drawn into the political trap. 
 
 WHAT DO INCANDESCENT LIGHTS COST? 
 
 The claim is often made that municipalities can pro- 
 duce incandescent lights for five cents per kilowatt, and 
 that the profits at that price will pay all expenses of street 
 lio-htingf. 
 
 HUDSON, Mass., a town with a population of 5,308, installed, in 
 1897, an electric plant at an expense of >'39,454. After embarking in this 
 business they found thej' could not oi)erate the plant without a loss, and 
 the laws of that state prohibit a municipalit}' conducting a business under 
 these conditions. They therefore applied to the commissioners for per- 
 mission to operate and levy a tax to cover the loss. The commissioners 
 granted a hearing, and after re^•iewing the case and the testimonj- sub- 
 mitted, the board saj- : ' ' It clearly appears that the cost for service is con- 
 siderably in excess of the present prices of 20 cents per kilowatt hour. 
 The board will give the matter favorable consideration, but the application 
 of public funds raised b3' taxation to meet the deficit so created in the 
 operating expenses of a municipal plant is repugnant to the idea of a fair 
 and equal sharing in thebenelits as well as the burdens of governments." 
 'The commissioners say that the testimony submitted shows that the cost 
 of producing the lights is considerably in excess of 20 cents per kilowatt. 
 
 57
 
 ^'OUT OF THE FRYING PAN INTO THE FIRE/' 
 
 CHICOPEE, Mass. The following statement, made by the mayor 
 of (hicopee, Mass., who favored municipal ownership, is like reports 
 from many other cities, who, when they first enter upon the experiment, 
 are very sanguine : "So far as municipal electric street lighting is con- 
 cerned, for the city of Chicopee, it is a most decided success. When the 
 city was under contract with the electric lighting company, the price 
 paid per arc light, moonlight schedule until 1a. m. , was $75 per light. 
 Judging from the year's experience of the city in doing its own street 
 lighting, I can see no business reason why the city cannot produce as 
 good lights at as small a cost as any private corporation." The mayor 
 says the lights, when furnished by a private company, cost $75 per lamp 
 per 3^ear. The Gas and Electric Light Commissioners of Massachusetts 
 report that the cost of a 1,300 candle power arc light, furnished by the 
 municipal plant, is $109.74 per lamp per year, burned 8.7 hours per night 
 28.8 nights per month. 
 
 GRAND RAPIDS, Mich., was paying $97 per light for a 2,000 
 candle power lamp burned every night all night. There were certain 
 politicians who thought there was a chance for them to ride into oflEice if 
 they shouted for municipal ownership. They sent a delegation to 
 Detroit, who reported cost of producing lights in that city. The private 
 company offered to furnish the lights for the same price it cost the 
 municipal plant in Detroit to produce them. They were not satisfied 
 with this, and finally voted in April, 1897, for municipal ownership, and 
 appropriated $150,000, selling bonds amounting to $125,000. A large 
 number of tax payers remonstrated and signed petitions, liut, as usual, 
 the non-taxpaying element voted to adopt the plan. The business has 
 been a bungle from the start, so much so that even the local papers say 
 the additional $40,000 saddled upon the tax payers for the city lighting 
 was not the first mistake. Good judges in that city claim that it will cost 
 over $200,000 to complete the plant. They made a contract for buildings 
 with a man who, the mayor says, " he would not employ to do work for 
 him under any consideration " ; yet the board employed such a man for 
 this work, and the foundations were constructed. After they were 
 completed and accepted by the board, and paid for, it was found that the 
 walls were unsafe, and the city employed an expert to make an exami- 
 nation, who said they were not properly bound, and the cement used was 
 worthless ; he also stated that more than half of the entire walls would 
 have to be rebuilt. They then made another contract to rebuild the 
 walls at the taxpayers' expense. The wire run through the streets 
 proved to be worthless, and would not support its own weight, while the 
 expert they called stated that the loss on such wire would be 50 per cent. 
 
 58
 
 They have one law suit already upon their hands over this i)lant, and a 
 prospect for several more. This whole business was entered upon after 
 the private company had offered to furnish the lights at the same price 
 as it cost in the municipal plant at Detroit. 
 
 MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP IN SANTA ROSA, CAL. 
 
 There has been so much said regarding cities being 
 able to purchase plants at a much lower rate than private 
 companies, that we copy the following report by Hon. 
 Thos. V. Bakewell, of the San Francisco bar, which shows 
 how such purchases are made by municipalities : 
 
 It i.s not the purpose of the writer to enter upon an extended discus- 
 sion of the general suliject of municipal ownership. Enough has been 
 alreadj' said and written upon both sides of this question by persons 
 l)etter qunlitied to discuss the subject than the writer. Nevertheless, 
 if any facts can be brought to the attention of the public, which will bear 
 upon the practical working of the system in a case in which the experi- 
 ment has been tried, it will certainly be profitable to consider them. 
 The question in which we are most vitally interested is its applicability 
 to our own times and conditions, and, if we are wise, we will not fail to 
 I)rotit by the experience of others. Municipal ownership is too costly an 
 experiment to be engaged in, if it has already proved futile. 
 
 It is my purpose to call attention to a certain notable instance in 
 which it has been attempted, in our own state, and not far distant from 
 our own city, to put the theory of municipal ownership into practice, in 
 connection with the water supply of a city. I refer to the public water 
 works of the city of Santa Eosa. As it has been asserted that municipal 
 ownership is especially suited to small cities and towns, it may be well to 
 note that the city of Santa Rosa is of this class, its population amounting 
 at the last census to 5,2'.in. 
 
 The facts stated herein are taken from the findings and judgment of 
 the court in the case of Mock v. The City of Santa Rosa, as shown in the 
 transcript on appeal to the supreme court of California. So far as prac- 
 tical )le and consistent with brevity, we have made use of the language of 
 the judge in the findings. The reliability of these facts is vouched for 
 by the integrity and ability of the judge who tried the cat-e, William R. 
 Daiugertield of San Francisco. Also, it may be safely assumed that the 
 findings were fullj' justified by the evidence in the case at the trial, as 
 
 59
 
 there -was no appeal taken on that ground. The supreme court affirmed 
 Judge Daingerfield's decision. 
 
 The attempt to construct a system of public water works in the city 
 of Santa Rosa has proved an absolute failure. The city council, having 
 taken the necessary preliminary steps required by the statute of 1889 as 
 amended, ordered a special election to be held on March 7th, 1893, to 
 vote on the question of the issuance by the city of bonds amounting to 
 $165,000, to pay for a system of public water works. The bonds were to 
 bear interest at four per cent, payable annually at a place to be fixed 
 therein by the council. The necessary notices were given, and the voters 
 of the city, on the day named, decided in favor of the bonds by a two- 
 thirds majority. One C. Monjeau had previousl3% at the order of the 
 council, prepared plans and specifications, together with two estimates 
 of costs, one amounting to !?165,000, and one amounting to $199, 500, and 
 these were placed on file with the city clerk on March 23, 1893. On 
 September 8th, 1894, the council ordered a notice to contractors to be 
 published, asking for bids on the construction of the water works. This 
 notice specified that the works were to be constructed according to the 
 specifications of Monjeau on file with the clerk ; that bids must be 
 accompanied by specifications, and also by a bond in six per cent of the 
 amount of the bids, binding the successful bidder to enter into a contract 
 with the city for the construction of the works, and further binding him 
 to furnish a bond in 75 per cent of the amount of the bid to secure per- 
 formance of the contract ; and the bids were to be opened on September 
 24th, 1894. 
 
 At some time prior to September 22d, Robert Eflfey and W. T. 
 Garratt & Co. entered into an agreement whereby it was agreed that, in 
 case Effey got the contract, Garratt ^fe Co. would build the works for him 
 for an amount less than $120,000, and would furnish a bond for $120,000 
 to do the work, and that they would also offer a bid themselves. 
 Accordingly, Garrett & Co. delivered to Effey on September 22d, 1894, a 
 bid purporting to be executed by them, offering to do the work according 
 to the specifications legally adopted. Effey filled in the amount, 
 $164,500, and the clause " the city to furnish the water rights, land, and 
 rights of way," wrote upon the envelope '' city of Santa Rosa, bids for 
 construction," and delivered the bid to the city clerk, on September 24th. 
 On the same day Effey filed a bid on his own behalf offering to do the 
 work "according to plans and specifications herewith submitted" for 
 $161,000. This bid was accompanied by a check for $10,000. The court 
 found that the script portions of these two bids, and also the writing 
 upon the envelopes were manifestly the same handwriting, either that of 
 Effey or of one Pitchford, as his agent in the premises. 
 
 It is not the purpose of this writer to detract from the reputations of 
 the gentlemen concerned in this matter, and yet this state of affairs must 
 be ascribed either to gross incompetence, or to collusion, on the part of 
 the city council. Their subsequent action would seem to point to the 
 latter conclusion. Here were but two bids, both of them very exorbitant. 
 The court finds that Effey knew that he could build the works, as called 
 
 60
 
 tor by the notice, for very much less than $120,000. Nevertheless, he 
 putiu a bid to build much less complete works for 8161,0' 0, and, iu order 
 to make his owu bid seem moderate, put iu another bid, in the name of 
 Garrett it Co., for 8164,500. This last bid did not even comply with the 
 formal requisites of the notice, not beinjj accompanied by specifications, 
 and the two bids were, as to the script portions, manifestly in the same 
 handwriting. If the common council of a city can be deceived by as 
 patent a device as this, it would seem better to endeavor to limit, rather 
 thau to extend, the amount of business affairs placed in their hands. 
 Furthermore, thej' awarded the contract in plain contravention of law, it 
 being a first principle of law that such contracts shall be awarded only 
 after the public has had a lawful opportunity' to bid upon the contract 
 awarded. 
 
 This was the agreement which was eventually carried out. Eflfey's 
 control over the mayor and council seems to have been absolute. They 
 accepted his bid for the construction of the works, when it was the only 
 one made which complied with the formal requisite of being accompanied 
 by specifications ; when it was exorbitant ; when it was manifestly 
 collusive with the only other offer received, and when it was void, on 
 account of variance from the requirements called for by their former 
 steps ; they attempted to issue bonds more valuable than they had the 
 power of issuing, with the purpose of turning them over to him ; and, 
 when they foxmd this impossible, they issued l)onds knowing that they 
 could not dispose of them legally, and with the purpose of turning them 
 over to Efl'e}', in contravention of law. The mayor and council then 
 devoted themselves to carrying out this agreement, and to so changing 
 the plans as to enable Effey to make a greater profit. 
 
 About Augiist loth, 189o, the mayor and council ordered the treas- 
 urer to return to Effey the check for $10,000 which accompanied his bid, 
 and no other check was ever given by Effey on his bid. 
 
 On September 28th, 1895, the mayor, E. F, Woodward, Robert Ef- 
 iey, J. W. Goodwin and Paul B. Perkins, met together in San Francisco, 
 and the following agreement was made : Effey was to be absolved from 
 furnishing any bonds to the city for faithful jierformance of the contract 
 about to be let to him ; Etfey was to thereafter assign the contract to 
 Perkins in pursuance of an agreement between Eflfey and Perkins that 
 the latter would construct the work for a sum not exceeding §120,000, 
 and Perkins was to execute to the city a bond in the sum of $40,000 to 
 construct the works according to the Monjeau plan. On the evening of 
 the same day, at nine o'clock, Effey, Perkins, Goodwin, the city clerk, 
 the city treasurer, the mayor and the common council met together 
 in Santa Rosa. The council passed a resolution authorizing E. F. 
 Woodward, the ma3'or, in behalf of the city of Santa Rosa, to enter 
 into a contract with Effey for the construction of a S3'stem of water 
 works in accordance with the Moujeaii plans, and authorizing the city 
 clerk to draw a warrant on the treasury for $161,000, payable to Effey, 
 and directing the city clerk to deliver the same to Efifey. The contract was 
 signed by the mayor and Effey, and the treasury warrant was delivered to 
 
 61
 
 Effey. Perkins gave a bond for $40,000 to construct the works. All the 
 parties then ratified the agreements described above ashavin^:, been made 
 iu Sau Francisco, on the same day, by the mayor, Effey, Perkins and 
 Goodwin, and in effect consummated the original design to deliver the 
 bonds to Effey as a payment in advance for the construction of the 
 works. We do not purpose to encumber this article l)}^ a detailed 
 account of the devices by which the parties concerned attempted to give 
 color of law to this transaction. The court found that Effey never paid 
 to the city of Santa Rosa, nor to the treasurer, any sum of money 
 whatsoever for the bonds, as he was required to do by law. 'the court 
 also found that the mayor and council, in taking these steps desired and 
 intended, if it were legally possible, to ratify all voidable proceedings 
 connected with the contract and water bonds, as to bind the municipal- 
 ity, so that complaining taxpayers could not successfully litigate these 
 matters in the courts, and also intended and desired to head off and 
 avoid any injunction or other judicial obstruction, and further that they 
 believed that they were acting for the best interests of the municipality 
 in so doing, notwithstanding the fact that they also knew not only the 
 voidness of the Effey bill, but that the superior court had so declared, 
 and notwithstanding the fact that they believed that their course, in 
 refusing to treat the Effey bill as void, would prevent litigation and ex- 
 pedite the construction of the water works, by summarily depriving 
 complaining taxpayers of redress from the courts. But the court con- 
 cluded that, despite of this intention, their acts in endeavoring to estop 
 the municipality in the premises, after full knowledge of the voidness 
 of Effey's bid, were fraudulent and void as against the city and its tax- 
 payers. 
 
 As to the claimed agreement that Perkins would construct the works 
 in'accordance with the Moujeau plans and specifications, the court con- 
 cluded that the voidness of his bid and of his contract was not cured 
 thereby, for the reason that his estimates of cost whereou he made his 
 bid were founded on his own offer and not on the Monjeau plans. This 
 agreement was evidently made for the purpose of curing the defect 
 which arose from the discrepancy between the terms of Effey's bid and 
 the notice to contractors 5 but no one except Effey ever had an oppor- 
 tunity to make an offer or bid on the work, from October 4th, 1S'.)4, when 
 Effey's l)id was accepted by the council, to September 28th, 1805, when 
 it was made to comply with the notice, nor was any notice ever given 
 that the bonds would be paid instead of money, for the work, nor that 
 the bond reciuired to be given in three-fourths of the amount of the bid, 
 to secure performance of the contract, would be waived. As a result of 
 this Judge Daingerfield found that the bid accepted was at least $70,000 
 higher than would have been bid to construct the works according to the 
 plans of Monjeau if the general public had been offered the same condi- 
 tions as were ofiered Effey, or if there had been money in tJie treasury 
 applicable to the payment of an accepted bid ; and responsible persons 
 who examined the specifications on file, with a view to bidding on the 
 
 62
 
 cuutract, were deterred from so doiuj;, by reason of these facts nnd b}' 
 reason of threatened litijrution. 
 
 The mayor and oonucil now commenced a systematic course of so 
 altering; the Monjeau phms as to whollj' chan^'e the nature of the con- 
 tract. On December lUth, 181)5, they passed a resohition chanjjfiug the 
 phins so as to call for the erection of a pumping: station according to 
 phius of Perkins filed with the clerk on that day, instead of in accordance 
 with those of Monjeau ; for the buildinj; of a reservoir, wholly dilTerent 
 in character and much lessexpensive tlian that called for l)y the Monjeau 
 plans ; for pumps accordin^jj to Perkins' own plans, instead of ^Nlonjeau's; 
 for boilers of a wholly different character from those called for by the 
 Monjeau plans, and for Perkins' hydrants. On Deceml)er 2:5d, 18!)"), the 
 council i)assed a resohition providinjj: for the erection of a cottajje for the 
 engineer at the pumpiug-statiou, according to plans of Perkins liled at 
 the time. 
 
 Ab8olutel3' no consideration passed to the city for making these 
 changes. It had been i)rovided in the specifications of Monjeau that, in 
 case of an J' change in the plans, the price of the work as changed shouhl 
 be fi.xed bj* arbitration between the contractor and the council, but the 
 price of the changes above referred to was never so fixed. This was 
 simply a voluntary- relinquishing, by the city, of certain rights. The 
 loss to the city by these alone amounted to $9,000. 
 
 Furthermore, the works were so poorly constructed that their actual 
 worth to the city was less than the cost of constructing them. For 
 example, by reason of faulty construction, one of the pumi)s and boilers, 
 constituting one-half of the plant at the pumping station, was unable to 
 draw water from the wells, and, on that account, had to be removed from 
 tliH punii)ing station and re-erected at the wells, at a cost to the city of 
 .$4.(!l'.).!);l Again, the reservoir was so unskillfullj' constructed that, upon 
 the first day of its test, it cracked and leaked when filled, and the water 
 escaped from the reservoir. 
 
 The council further displayed its generosity towards Effey by allow- 
 ing bills against the city for alleged extras 8api>lied to the city, amounting 
 to !*1,28(», all of which, excei)t !i*114. was for work aiul materials which 
 were called for, not only by his contract to construct the works in 
 accordance with the .Monjeau jjlans, but also were called for \>y the terms 
 of the resolutions changing these plans. 
 
 On January 2d, 18!»(), diiring the pendency of the suit of Mock v. 
 City of Santa Kosa. which was brought for the purpose of setting aside 
 Effey'8 contract and recovering damages against the persons ctjucerned 
 in the transactions which we Ijave described, the mayor and council 
 passed a resolution accepting the water works constructed by Perkins 
 and ordering the city marshal to take possession of them on behalf of the 
 city, Perkins assenting in writing. This action was taken by the mayor 
 and council in the belifd' that the construction of the works had been 
 practically finished, and that their action would in law have the effect of 
 preventing successful litigation against the validity of the contract, 
 including the action of IMock v. City of Santa Kosa, and rendering 
 
 03
 
 nugatory any judgment in that action, or in any contemplated litigation. 
 It was simply another fraudulent and void attempt to estop the city from 
 claiming its rights in the premises. 
 
 On January 2d, 1896, when the city accepted and took possession of the 
 public works and offered to make connections and supply water to the 
 inhabitants, there were 1,050 connections which had been made with 
 other water works in the city. Up to December 11th, 1890, the time of 
 the trial of the action of Mock v. City of Santa Eosa, and before which 
 time the works had been entirely completed, the greatest nvimber of 
 connections which had been made with the public works was (iSO in all, 
 and the works were not able to furnish even that number of connections 
 with water during the summer months. 
 
 Besides this, the city itself had to purchase, as a matter of reason- 
 able prudence, water from other water works for municipal uses, such as 
 sprinkling streets and flushing sewers, at an expense to the city, from 
 February to December, 1890, of $1,184.81, 
 
 The relation of any legislative body to the government for which it 
 legislates, whether municipal or state, is, so far as administering its 
 finances is concerned, that of a trustee. It is bound to guard the inter- 
 ests of its constituent body most jealously. A man who is acting entirely 
 on his own behalf may be generous or exacting, as it may suit his incli- 
 nation ; but a trustee, in dealing with persons whose interests are neces- 
 sarily opposed to those of his beneficary, is bound to deal with them at 
 arm's length. That which is an act of charity, when the means of doing 
 it are taken from one's own pocket, is plain robbery when the means are 
 taken from trust funds. Therefore anything approaching collusion on the 
 part of the common council of a city with those with whom the city is con- 
 tracting, either in the disposal of the city'sbondsor in awarding of a con- 
 tract for public work, is bound to prove disastrous to the city. In the case 
 which we have been considering the mayor and city coxincil seem to have 
 been entirely without any volition in the matter except to follow the nod 
 and beck of Effey and Perkins. They enacted, repealed and re-enacted 
 at the behest of these men. It matters not to what reason we may 
 ascribe this, whether to dishonesty on the part of the council or to inef- 
 ficiency on their part, or to craftiness on the part of the persons with 
 whom they were dealing, in deceiving the council as to the city's inter- 
 ests. The result was that the city of Santa Rosa paid $165,701.25 in 
 bonds, besides $1,286 in cash, for a system of water works which proba- 
 bly' could have been built for $79,000, and were worth much less on ac- 
 count of faulty construction. Even then about one-half of the city was 
 compelled to purchase its water Supply from other water works. 
 
 Other cities, when contemplating the question of municipal owner- 
 ship, whether it be of water works, of railroads or of gas works, should 
 first look carefully into the question to ascertain whether there is reason 
 to suppose that their experience will be different. The inefficiency of 
 our municipal governments is widely admitted. Some have accounted 
 for it by our form of government. Political theorists generally admit 
 that the great drawback in the republican form of government is its 
 
 64
 
 inaptitude for administrative affairs. The abilitj- of our municipal gov- 
 ernments successfully to undertake the ownership of water works is ex- 
 tremely doubtful, and until it has been demonstrated it would be well 
 for other cities to keep Santa Rosa's experience well in mind. 
 
 MUNICIPAL PLANT RECORDS. 
 
 In the reports from municipal plants, the actual 
 interest paid by each city is given. Depreciation is cal- 
 culated in every case at five per cent. The best authorities 
 consider this too low. but, as the Massachusetts bill made 
 that rate, it has been used in this work. 
 
 Operating expenses are precisely as shown by the 
 city records, and no charge is made for a sinking fund if 
 bonds were not issued. All bonds are based upon 20 years, 
 but the reports show that in many cases they will mature 
 before that time expires. 
 
 The income from commercial lights and power are 
 the amounts as shown by the official records of each city, 
 also the number of street lights used, and their candle 
 power. 
 
 AUSTIN, Texas . The risks a municipality incurs when they adopt 
 municipal ownership is shown by the experience of Austin. 
 
 They invested $1,750,000 in an electric light and water works plant. 
 
 Contracts were made with the two street railwaj's to furnish them 
 with power from the citj" plant. 
 
 In a short time the water began to fail, and they had to shut off all 
 lights and power, finally shutting down the entire plant. 
 
 This compelled one of the railroads to haul their cars with mules, 
 while the other rented locomotives from the Houston and Texas railroad. 
 
 The city was left in darkness for weeks. 
 
 As a climax to the municipal enterprise, and while the city was on 
 the verge of bankruptcy, caused by municipal ownership, the dam, 
 which was Iniilt to furnish power and lights for the citj- gave way. and 
 swept the electric light plant and water works awa3% utterly wrecking 
 and destroying the entire busin<;88, wiping out over one hundred build- 
 ings in the city, and leaving it in darkness, as well as destitute of water 
 for tire or domestic use, and entailing a loss of over $3,000,000. 
 
 Now, the tax payers have to provide for the debt of §1,750,000 
 
 (5)
 
 expended in establishing the municipal plant, and the interest upon 
 same, as well as the immense damage caused by this failure of the dam, 
 and the consequent loss to individuals, for which the city is liable ; while 
 they have nothing to show for all this expenditure or these liabilities ; 
 everything is wrecked. 
 
 Here we have a practical illustration of the workings of municipal 
 ownership, and the risks a municipality assumes when they engage in a 
 business enterprise. 
 
 The advocates of the system said, adopt and save a mint of money, 
 experience discloses an enormous loss. 
 
 W. D. Hornaday has described the situation so fully, that we quote 
 from his letter : 
 
 '' Brief mention has been made in the press dispatches of the leaks 
 in the great dam across the Colorado river at Austin, Texas, and the 
 almost complete suspension of the operation of the municipal electric 
 light and power plant, on account of the limited siipply of water with 
 which to run the turbines. This serious condition of affairs will probably 
 continue for an indefinite period, as there seems to be no way of stopping 
 these leaks, which are gradually draining the great lake formed by the 
 dam of its water. The people of Austin have come face to face with the 
 problem of municipal ownership, and it is hard to foretell what the 
 solution will be. 
 
 "The project of constructing a gigantic dam across the Colorado 
 river, at a point three miles west of Aiistin, had its inception in 1890, and, 
 after considerable agitation, the proposition for the city to issue bonds 
 to the amount of ^1,400,000 to carry out the enterprise was voted upon 
 and carried by a big majority, at a municipal election held on May 5, 1891. 
 These bonds were sold, and the work of constructing the dam began. 
 It was found that $1,400,000 was not sufficient to complete the work, and 
 in 1894 another issue of $200,000 was voted. In addition to the proceeds 
 from the sale of these bonds, about $150,000 was used by the city in 
 completing the dam and constructing the municipal water works plant 
 and electric light and power house, making the total cost of the enter- 
 prise about $1,750,000. The $1,400,000 of bonds bear five per cent, and 
 mature in 40 years; the $200,000 issue bears six per cent, and also mature 
 in 40 years. Nearly all of these bonds are held in the east. 
 
 '' Before the construction of the dam was undertaken, it was asserted 
 by competent engineers that it would be impossible to prevent leakages, 
 owing to the fact that all this section is of limestone formation, and sink- 
 holes abound along the course of the Colorado river. Despite these 
 warnings the great enterprise was carried out. While the work on the 
 dam was still in progress, a large stream of water burst forth a short 
 distance below it. Although it was thought to be a leak at the time, no 
 effort to stop it was made. Since then other leaks have occurred, and it 
 is claimed, by those who have conducted an investigation, that a big 
 volume of water is pouring out from underneath the masonry work, near 
 the center of the dam. During the period from August 14 to September 
 14, of the present year, the water in the lake, formed by the dam, fell ten 
 
 6Q
 
 feet, und thiit this great fall was due to leaks is shuwu by the fact that the 
 volume of flowing water in the river below the dam is greater than usual 
 at this season of the year. In addition to these leaks, the city authorities 
 with soon have to contend with the problem of cleaning out the lake. 
 The water in the lake at the dam was originally GO feet deep. Soundings 
 show that there is now but 27 feet of water, sand and sediment from the 
 great watershed above having lilled up the bed of the lake to a depth of 
 33 feet. No provision was made in the construction of the dam for clean- 
 ing out the bed of the lake. 
 
 '* There are three penstocks at the dam. When the water in the lake 
 reaches the crest of the dam the head of water at the penstocks is IG feet. 
 The cit}- uses but one of these penstocks. It is estimated that the 
 average flow of the river is eciuivalent to 1,000 horse power, without 
 making au}- allowance for evaporation or leakage. It was estimated that 
 the storage of the waters of the river, by the construction of the dam, 
 woukl atford not less than 14,000 horse power, which would give a surplus 
 of 12,500 horse power, the amount required bj' the city being only 1,500. 
 It was believed by the promoters of the project that there would be no 
 difficulty in disposing of this surplus power to manufacturing concerns, 
 and that the city would derive a handsome revenue from that source, but 
 there has been no realization of these expectations, not a single manu- 
 facturing enterprise having been established here by reason of the water 
 power advantages. The amount of water powder now used by the city at 
 the dam is from 300 to 500 horse power. 
 
 ' ' The gross receipts derived by the city from the water works and 
 electric light and power plant, when it is in full operation, are about 
 8G0,000 per year. The aggregate expenses of operating the plant are 
 about 8174,000 per j'ear, including the 8114,000 interest upon the bonded 
 debt. Previous to establishing its own water works and electric light 
 and power plant, the city paid a private company here 818,000 per annum 
 for Ijetter service than is now costing the tax payers 8174,000 per annum. 
 The present city tax rate is 2. '60k on 8100. Before the building of the 
 dam and municipal water works and electric light and power plant, the 
 tax rate was only 00 cents on $100, sufficient revenue being derived from 
 this rate of taxation to pay the private water and light plant for their 
 hj'drant service, street lights, etc. , and also interest on 8125,000 of bonds 
 which the city had out at the rate of ten per cent interest per annum. 
 
 ''The present city valuation is about 811,000.000, which amount is 
 much above the real value. Before the establishmeut of this gigantic 
 municipal enterprise, the property valuation of the city was 86,000,000, 
 and with the tax rate of 00 cents there was derived sufficient revenue to 
 meet every obligation. Store rooms in the business centre of the city that 
 formerly rented for 8100 per month now rent for 825 to $35 per month. 
 If the estimate of $0,000,000 of real valuation for the city is correct, 
 and with a bonded debt of 81,000,000, the city of Austin has been given 
 a credit of over 20 per cent, when all statistics show that no corporation 
 is entitled to over Ave per cent of its assessed valuation. 
 
 " The proposition is a hard one for the city authorities to deal with, 
 
 67
 
 and they are coping with it the best they can under the circumstances. 
 It has been fully demonstrated that the water power which should be 
 afforded by the dam cannot be depended upon, and steps have been taken 
 looking to the purchase and installation of an auxiliary steam plant to 
 cost in the neighborhood of $75,000." 
 
 The Electrical World says : 
 
 The city council of Austin, Texas, has voted not to pay interest on 
 its $1,327,000 five per cent city water and light bonds, due January 1 , 1900, 
 The city is thus forced to default in the payment of its quarterly interest. 
 This measure is understood to mean that the council intends repudiating 
 the issue. 
 
 Representatives of the eastern holders of the Austin water and light 
 bonds 'are here investigating the financial condition of the city, and 
 compiling data to be used in the preparation of suits to be filed by the 
 bond holders in the federal court for the recovery of the defaulted 
 interest and principal due them on the bonds. The action of the city 
 council, in seeking to repudiate this bonded indebtedness of $1,500,000, 
 is being severely criticised hy the majority of tax payers of this city. 
 The project of installing an auxiliary steam plant at the electric light and 
 power station here has been al)audoned, on account of the critical condi- 
 tion of affairs which now confronts the city. 
 
 The Electrical Review says : 
 
 THE AUSTIN DAM, 
 
 The unfortunate and fatal failure of one of the most pretentious 
 municipal enterprises ever undertaken in the United States. The city 
 of Austin, Tex., undertook to build this enormous hydraulic work, 
 damming up the Colorado river and developing a power sufficient to 
 operate the municipal water works, municipal electric light plant, muni- 
 cipal power plant for the street railway company, and municipal plant 
 for the production of power for sale. The cost of the enterprise was 
 somewhat more than one million dollars. For seven years it has been 
 in operation and its destruction only calls attention to the fact that as an 
 enterprise it was a distinct failure. Outstanding bonds for the construc- 
 tion of the dam, amounting to one million three hundred thousand dol- 
 lars, are held by various investors, and upon these bonds the city has 
 defaulted in payment of interest for two quarters. The city is still 
 deeply in debt from its dam enterprise, and to-day is without light, 
 without water, without street cars and almost without hope on account of 
 the failure of its big plaything. There is little prospect of the dam being 
 rebuilt and the outlook for the bondholders is not cheerful. While 
 deeply sympathizing with the people of the unfortunate city in the catas- 
 trophe that has overwhelmed it and them, it is not unkind to say that 
 they afford at present a spectacle of deep interest and great importance, 
 which is urgently recommended to the studious attention of every advo- 
 cate of municipal ownfership of any sort. 
 
 68
 
 City Qovcrnment says : 
 
 AUSTIN'S EXPENSIVE " TIX WHISTLE." 
 
 The Texas flood is to be deplored, particnliirly in the loss of life. 
 The calamit}', however, calls national attention to the tragic ending of a 
 colossal scheme of municipal ownership. The plan was to utilize the 
 14. ODD horse power in supplying light and water to the city and sell the 
 large balance of power to manufacturers who would be induced to locate 
 in Austin. 
 
 The trained engineers and the best business talent or' the city pointed 
 cut the impractical and impossible conditions surrounding the undertak- 
 ing, but the politician saw, or thought he saw, his great opportunity, and 
 piished the plan along. Result : The prophecies were fulfilled, for, 
 although nearly 82,000,000 were expended, nothing was realized from 
 the outlay. Municipal ownership on business principles may be all 
 right, but upon political foundations is sure to be wrong. 
 
 J. B. Boyd of Texas says : 
 
 To get a little nearer home with an illustration of the "Attitude of 
 Mtiuicipal Corporations to the Public, "we can dwell a moment over the gi- 
 gantic municipal investment at Austin. While the writer was not a resi- 
 dent of your state during the " pioneer period " thereof, he distinctly 
 remembers reading in the papers about the '' coming Moses" which was 
 to rescue Austin from the slough of despond and at one grand stroke 
 place her on the topmost pinnale of fame. She has obtained the fame 
 all right, but is practically bankrupt, or expects to be, e.ccording to state- 
 ments appearing from time to time in the local papers. There is hardly 
 room for doubting but what the monthly balance shows a red ink balance 
 on the wrong side of the ledger of some eight thousand dollars, and that 
 the tax rate has been increased over 150 per cent, but she has a muni- 
 cipal plant all right, and if she can possibly raise the necessary funds 
 she is likely to increase her holdings in a supplementary investment de- 
 signed to discount the annual rainfall. If successful in raising the pro- 
 posed funds, she will have a little more municipal plant than she now 
 possesses. As her line of credit has already been extended far beyond 
 good financiering practice, it is not altogether apparent where the money 
 is to come from. Texas bankers and financiers with whom the writer 
 has conversed on the matter seem to feel that it is only a question of a 
 short time ere the city of Austin will become bankrupt through this 
 monumental example of the '' Attitude of Municipal Corporations to the 
 Public." 
 
 ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, N. J., plant, $15,000; operating expenses, 
 $4,900.75; interest at 5 per cent., $750 ; depreciation, $750; taxes and 
 water rent, $150 ; insurance, ^100 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $750; 
 making *7,400, less income from commercial lights, $2,293.56, and we have 
 $5,106.44, cost of street lights, being $75 per lamp per year, burned 2,000 
 hours, costing .0375 per hour and furnishing 533 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. The following statement has been printed widely in papers 
 
 G9
 
 advocating municipal ownership, and cited as an illustration of the suc- 
 cess achieved by the system at Atlantic Highlands: " Including the pay- 
 ment of the interest on the issue of bonds, the total amount paid by the 
 town for its street lighting has been $1,808.27. The streets are lighted 
 with 68 arc lights, and the amount paid by the town for street lighting is 
 only $26.50 per lamp, or a trifle less than one-third the price offered by 
 the lowest private company." 
 
 It is plainly stated in this article that the total amount paid by the 
 town was $1,808.27, while an examination of the treasurer's books shows 
 that $750 was paid for interest on bonds, $867.25 for coal, $1,616.60 for 
 labor and salaries charged to the electric department, making a total for 
 these three items of $3,283.85, not including any of the other expenses 
 of the plant, or depreciation, or sinking fund to pay bonds. 
 
 ATLANTIC, Iowa, plant, $40,000 ; coal, $1.50 per ton ; operating ex- 
 penses, $7,638.97; interest at 5 per cent, $2,000; depreciation, $2,000; taxes, 
 insurance and water rent, $400 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,250 ; mak- 
 ing $13,288.97, less income, $7,924.49, and we have $5,364.48, cost of 12 
 2,000-candle power arc and 160 32-candle power incandescent street lights, 
 equivalent to 47 arc lights burned 2,200 hours, costing. 0518 per hour, and 
 furnishing 386 candle power per hoiir for one cent. 
 
 ' ABINGTON, Va., plant, $12,500 ; coal, $3. 00 per ton; operating ex- 
 penses, $1,800 ; interest at 6 percent, $750 ; depreciation, $625 ; taxes and 
 insurance, $125 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $625 ; making $3,925, less in- 
 come, $2,300, and we have cost of street lights burned 4,000 hours, cost- 
 ing .027 per hour, andfurnishiDg592 candlepower per hour for one cent. 
 
 AMES, Iowa, plant, $16,844; coal, $1.55 per ton; operating expenses, 
 $7,006.70; interest at six per cent, $1,011.84; depreciation, $848.20; 
 taxes and insurance, $168 ; making $9,123.74, less income, $6,400, and 
 we have $2,729.74, cost "of [street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing 
 .0836 per hour, and furnishing 239 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ATKIN. Minn., plant, $10,000; operating expenses, $2,550; interest 
 at six per cent, $600 ; depreciation, $500 ; taxes and insurance, $100 ; 
 making $3,750, less income, $2,700, and we have $1,050, cost of street 
 lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .035 per hour, and furnishing 343 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ATHENS, Ala , plant, $6,000 ; coal, $2 per ton ; operating expenses^ 
 $1,400; interest at five per cent, $300; depreciation, $300 ; taxes and 
 insurance, $60 ; sinking fund to meet bonds, $300 ; a total of $2,360, 
 deducting all income, $1,800, and we have $560, for street lights 
 burned 1,200 hours, costing .0233 per hour, and furnishing 686 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ANDERSON, Ind., plant, $75,000, and they use natural gas for 
 fuel ; operating expenses, $6,000 ; interest at six per cent, $4,500 ; 
 
 70
 
 depreciation, $3,750 ; taxes aud insurance, >^750 ; makino: $15,000, less all 
 income, $5,000, and we have $10,0(J0, for street lio:hts burned 2,000 
 hours, costing .0223 per hour, and furnishing DOO candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 ALLEGHENY, Pa., plant, $2G5,000 ; coal, $1 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $54. 008 ; interest at four per cent, $10,600; depreciation, 
 $13,250 ; water tax, $500; taxes lost on two-thirds cost of plant. $2,000 ; 
 sinking fund to pay bonds, $5,000 ; making $86,258, cost of street lights 
 burned 3,976 hours, costing .0197 per hour, and furnishing 1,010 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. The superintendent from Allegheny, in a 
 discussion at New Haven, stated that, "if New Haven was getting its 
 lamps at $98.55 per year, when the adjustment of the account was made 
 to correspond with the difference for local conditions, that the price in 
 New Haven is less than the price of the municipal plant at Allegheny." 
 
 ADRIAN, Minn., plant, $13,000 ;^ operating expenses, $1,819; 
 interest at live per cent, $650 ; depreciation, $650 ; taxes and insurance, 
 $130 ; making $3,249, less income, $1,800, and we have $1,449, cost of 
 street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .0086 per hour, and furnishing 
 174 caudle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ARLINGTON, Minn., plant, $4,000; operating expenses, $1,200; 
 interest at six per cent, $240 ; depreciation, $200 ; taxes and insurance, 
 $40 ; making $1,680, less income, $1,250, and we have $430, cost of street 
 lights burned 1,200 hours, costing .1.895 per hour, aud furnishing 134 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 AURORA, 111., plant, $51,500; coal, $1.75 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $10,306 ; interest at five per cent, $2,575 ; depreciation, $2,575; 
 taxes and insurance, $510, making $15,966, cost of street lights, burned 
 2,500 hours, costing .031 per hour, and furnishing 645 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 ASHTABULA, Ohio, plant, $80,000 : coal, $2.05 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $15,000: interest at 4 per cent, $3,200; depreciation, $4,000; taxes 
 and insurance. $800; sinking fund to pay bonds, $2,400 ; making $25,400, 
 less income, $13,000, and we have $12,400, cost of street lights burned 
 2,000 hours, costing .0568 per hour, and furnishing 352 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 ALEXANDRIA, Va., plant $16,000; operating expenses, $5,000 ; 
 interest at 5 per cent, $800 ; depreciation, $800 ; taxes and insurance, 
 $160 ; making $0,760, cost of street lights burned 3,750 hours, costing 
 .0195 per hour, and furnishing 769 candle power for one cent. 
 
 ALEXANDRIA, Minn., plant, $17,500; operating expenses, 
 $2,457.09; interest at 6 per cent, $1,050; depreciation, $875; taxes and 
 insurance, $175; making $4,557.09, less income, $2,694.06, aud we have
 
 $1,863.03, cost of street lij^hts burned 1,500 hours, costing .0828 per hour, 
 and furnishing 241 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 BELLVUE, Iowa, plant, costing $15,000, coal $3.50 per ton; 
 operating expenses, $2,370 ; interest at G per cent, $900 ; depreciation, 
 $750 ; taxes and insurance, $150: making $4,170, less income, $2,400, and 
 we have $1,776, as cost of street lights burned 3,800 hours, costing .0213 
 per hour, and furnishing 566 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 BAY CITY. Mich., plant, $39,000, and coal $1.50 per ton ; operat- 
 ing expenses, $9,538.72; interest at 4 per cent, $1,560; depreciation, 
 $1,950 ; taxes and insurance, $200 ; total, $13,248 72, cost of street lights 
 burned 2,000 hours, and costing .0201 per hour, and furnishing 766 can- 
 dle power i>eT hour for one cent. 
 
 The Tribune recently said : 
 
 " The manner in which thg streets of Bay City are lighted (or rather 
 not lighted) has ceased to be a subject of humorous mention and should 
 be given some consideration by the common council. The city has an 
 expensive lighting plant, but for at least one-third of the month the 
 people who pay taxes for the support of public institutions do not realize 
 that fact, especially if they have business which takes them upon the 
 streets at night. It is time to call a halt and light the streets after the 
 manner of modern, up-to-date cities." 
 
 BLOOMFIELD, Iowa, purchased an electric plant in 1891 for 
 $14,000, in 1896 their dynamos failed, and had to be replaced with new 
 ones at a cost of $5,000, making an outlay of $19,000. They report that 
 they can duplicate the plant to-day for $9,000, making a depreciation of 
 one-half of the investment. Their incandescent lights are burned 2,000 
 hours, costing $12.96 per year per lamp. All of the reports show that 
 this plant has been a loosing venture. 
 
 BLOOMINGTON, 111., plant, $125,000; coal, $1.95 per ton; 
 operating expenses, $17,000 ; interest at four per cent, $5,000 ; deprecia- 
 tion, $6,250; taxes and insurance, $1,000; making $29,250, as cost of 
 street lights burned 2,555 hours, costing .0366 per hour, and furnishing 
 540 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 BETHANY, Mo., plant, $25,000; coal, $3 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $2,000; interest at four and one-half per cent, $1,112 ; depre- 
 ciation, $1,250 ; taxes and insurance, $250 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, 
 $950; making $5,562, less income, $2,500, and we have $3,062, cost of 
 street lights burned 2,200 hours, costing .0397 per hour, and furnishing 
 302 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 BELMONT, Mass., plant, $16,000; cost per lamp per year, as shown 
 by sworn statements made to the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners, 
 was $121.11 for 1,200 candle power burned 1,478 hours, costing ,0812 per 
 
 72
 
 hour, and furnishing 147 candle power per hour for one cent. They also 
 use 2.") candle power incandescent on the streets, costing $30.28 per year, 
 only burned 1 ,478 hours. 
 
 BRAINTREE, Mass., plant, SG7,0r.7 ; cost of a 1.200 candle power 
 lamp per year, as made to the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners of 
 Massachusetts, was $89.91. burned 2,800 hours, costing .u;i9 per hour, 
 and furnishing 307 candle power per hour for one cent. They use 25 
 incandescents on side streets, costing $22.48 per year, burned 2,300 hours. 
 
 BATAVIA, N. Y., plant, $27,;")38.91 ; coal $1.77 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, ^5,113.41; interest at four per cent, ^LlOl.-'io: depreciation, 
 $1,37(5.94 ; taxes, $275 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $750 ; making 
 $8,610,90, cost of street lights burned 3, COO hours, costing .0213 per hour, 
 and tnrnishing 938 candle power per hoar for one cent. The salary of 
 the engineer is charged to the water works. There has Ijeen charged 
 to construction $5,738.91, but, as there are only nine more lamps in 
 circuit, it is evident that most of this item should have gone to expense 
 account. Two armatures were burned out during the year. 
 
 BANGOR, Me., plant, $40,000; water power, operating expenses, 
 $6,500: interest at four per cent. $1,600; depreciation, $2,000; taxes 
 and insurance, $400: making $10,500, cost of streetlights burned 4,000 
 hours, costing .0152 per hour, and furnishing 789 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 The cost charged for plant does not include any part of the building, 
 wheel, pit wheel, or gears and shafting, or for the water power or repairs 
 on the dam. 
 
 BOWLING GREEN, Ky., plant, $18,000: coal, $1.28 per ton ; 
 operating expenses, $3,980.23; interest at six per cent, $1,080 ; deprecia- 
 tion, $900; taxes and insurance, $180 ; making $6,140.23, cost of street 
 lights burned 2,200 hours, costing .0387 per hour, and furnishing 516 
 candle power per hour for one cent. Upon an examination of the water 
 works accounts, we find that the superintendent's and bookkeeper's 
 salaries, stationery and interest, were charged to that department, and 
 nothing to the light plant. 
 
 BLUE ISLAND, 111., plant, $20,000; lights burned 1,875 hours, 
 costing .0451 per hour, and furnishing 443 candle power per hour for one 
 •cent. 
 
 CARTHAGE, Ohio, plant, $15,000 ; coal, $2.00 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $2,500 ; interest at five per cent, $750; depreciation, $750; 
 taxes and insurance, $150 ; making $4,150, cost of street lights burned 
 8,000 hours, costing .0288 per hour, , and furnishing (i94 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 CLYDE. Ohio, plant, $12,000; coal, $1.76 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $5,0u0 ; interest at six per cent, $720: depreciation, $600;
 
 taxes and insurance, $120 ; sinking fimd to pay bonds, $(500 ; making 
 $7,040, less income for ineandescents, $2,500, and we have $4,540, as 
 cost of street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .057 per hour, and 
 furnishing 350 candle power per hour for one cent 
 
 COLUMBUS, Ind,, plant, $11,457 ; coal, $1.50 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $8,493.05 ; interest at five per cent, $572.85 ; depreciation, 
 $572.85; taxes and insurance, $114; making $4,752.75, cost of street 
 lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0334 per hour, and furnishing 598 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 CATAWISSA, Pa., plant. $10,000; coal, $1.00 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $2,200 ; interest at five per cent, $500 : depreciation, $500 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $50 ; sinking fund to meet bonds, ,$600 ; making 
 $3,850, less income, $2,200, and we have $1,650, as cost of street lights 
 burned 4,000 hours, costing .0189 per hour, and furnishing 1,058 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 CHARITON, Iowa, plant, ^50,000 ; coal, $1.25 per ton ; operating 
 expenses from 1894 to 1900, $40,757.75, less total income for same time, 
 $34,379.01, leaving an operating expense, over receipts, of $6,378.74, 
 averaging $1,003.12 per year ; and interest at four per cent ou cost of 
 plant, $2,000; depreciation, $2,500; taxes, $500; making $6,063.12, cost 
 of street lights, being for six five-ampere lights and 117 32-candle power 
 incandescent lights used in streets, equivalent to 46 1,200-candle poAver 
 lamps, and costing $131.80 per year per lamp, burned 2,500 hours, costing 
 .0527 per hour, and furnishing 227 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The cost being so high, we applied to the city clerk for his correction 
 of the figures, showing operating expenses each year since 1894. and the 
 income received for the same time, and the amounts given are those 
 certified to by him. 
 
 He also said that a judgment of $19,000 was obtained against the 
 city, but they had paid this off. He did not explain what the judgment 
 was for, or how it was obtained. 
 
 CRAWFORDSVILLE, Ind. So much had been said about this 
 plant, and the officials refusing to give any infoi'mation or allow any ex- 
 amination, it was decided to make a full canvass of the city and inter- 
 view its most prominent citizens who were only interested in the plant 
 as tax payers. 
 
 A strange condition of affairs was disclosed. The first one approached 
 was asked if they had a municipal plant in that city, and his answer was, 
 ''We do own our light plant, but if we did not we would not, for, 
 in my opinion, it will bankrupt any city." Another being asked if the 
 plant was not a success; his answer was, "So far as the cost of plant 
 and street lights is concerned, the venture is certainly a fearful failure. 
 The plant can be duplicated to-day with new apparatus for $30,000 less 
 than it has cost the taxpayers." 
 
 One citizen, when asked about cost of the electric plant, answered, 
 
 74
 
 " It is impossible to procure facts, the ring ■wlio manage the citj' finding 
 the electric plant in the past giving more milk than any other teat acces- 
 6il:)le, refuse to make public any information." 
 
 Another, when interviewed, said, "The ring that initiated the enter- 
 prise assured the taxpayers that the maximum outlay would in no con- 
 tingency exceed .$32,000, but afterwai-ds admitted that it had cost 
 $80,000, while the cost now exceeds .^105,000." 
 
 One citizen, when asked if the profits on commercial lights did not 
 pay the entire expenses of running the plant, answered, "After deduct- 
 ing the entire income for such lights and adding interest, depreciation, 
 operating expenses and salaries, the street lights cost the tax payers $85 
 per lamp per year." One prominent tax payer, when asked if the profits 
 of the electric plant were not lessening the taxes very materially, said, 
 " No: the expense of keeping the plant running bids fair to become an 
 unendurable tax, and for the past two years pressure has been urgent to 
 have the plant sold, but the amount of investment above honest cost is 
 so great that no private company will make an oflt'er that the citj' can 
 bring itself to come down to." 
 
 When one citizen was asked why the tax payers did not have experts 
 examine and appraise the plant, answered, "Practical constructors 
 offered, two years ago, to duplicate the plant for $50,000. The fact is, 
 we are much in the condition of the man who had the wolf by the tail, 
 afraid to either hold ou or let go. My impression is, however, that so 
 burdensome is the matter, the city will ere long make some radical 
 change, feeling that it can scarcely be the loser by any release from pres- 
 ent status." The lights were burned 2,000 hours, costing .0425 per hour, 
 and furnishing 470 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 If space permitted a large number of of other interviews, showing 
 the same feeling and results could be given. 
 
 No wonder the local paper said, ''What our electric lights coat is 
 something past finding out, at least so far no one hag been able to find out. 
 For a long time we took it for granted that everything was all right, but 
 a little investigation goes to show that everything is all wrong." 
 
 CHICAGO, 111., plant, $1,155,000; coal, $2.50 per ton : operating ex- 
 penses, $157,486.58; interest at 4 per cent, $40,200; depreciation, $57,750; 
 taxes, $11,000 ; making $272,436.53, cost of street lights burned 4,000 
 hours, costing .0235 per hour and furnishing 851 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 The Western Fjleetrician of Chicago, an authority upon the electri- 
 cal business of that city, says : 
 
 It is the old story. City officers and commercial electric-light com- 
 panies make their calculations and estimates on different bases. For in- 
 stance, in Mr. Ellicott's tables there is no allowance whatever for depre- 
 ciation. Instead, the city electrician charges to operating expense such 
 amounts as were necessary to renew any part of the plants. He con- 
 tends that '' the ordinary depreciation of the plants is taken care of in 
 
 75
 
 the annual expenses of maintaining the lights, and an examination of the 
 plants -will show that the application of a further and theoretical per 
 cent for depreciation is not necessary or warranted in order to obtain the 
 true cost to the city." But is this a prudent and sound position? Can 
 the " true cost " be arrived at by such an assumption ? An examination 
 of the city plants would show that they are equipped with new or compar- 
 atively new machinery. There is now comparatively little expense for 
 renewals, because such a large amount of new equipment has been pur- 
 chased within the last two or three years. But how will the case stand 
 ten or twenty years from now? Will the present dynamos and lamps be 
 still in service, and, if they are, will they be regarded as economical, up- 
 to-date apparatus, or as obsolete ? The inventory shows that the city 
 electric-light plants, aside from land and buildings, are valued at about 
 $1,000,000. Ten per cent of that set aside for depreciation will add at 
 once $34.56 to the cost of operating and maintaining the 2,893 arc lamps 
 figured'in Mr. Ellicott's tables, bringing the cost up to $90.40 a lamp. If a 
 five per cent basis of depreciation be accepted (and managers of plants 
 will agree that that is a small percentage to set aside to keep the plant in- 
 tact and economically up to date for an indefinite period), the cost of op- 
 eration and maintenance is increased from $55.93 to $73.21. 
 
 Take the matter of taxes. The real and personal property repre- 
 sented in the Chicago municipal lighting plants is $1,155,000. The city 
 receives no revenue in taxation from this property. The plant is neces- 
 sary for the lighting of the streets, so that if the city did not own it 
 somebody else would and would pay, say $11,000 in taxes. This loss in 
 revenue is part of what the cit3' pays for its lights, and amounts to $3.80 
 a lamp. Added to the $73.21 above (taking the five per cent depreciation) , 
 the cost of operation and maintenance is now $77.01. 
 
 Then, too, is it not fair to assume that the tax payers' money put into 
 these plants is worth something ? Should we not allow interest on the 
 investment ? Does any private person invest money in a business with- 
 out charging against that business the minimum interest that his capital 
 would bring in any event ? If the city borrows money to build electric 
 light plants does it not pay interest on the bonds ? The justice of this 
 charge seems to be self-evident. Let us assume, then, a '6h per cent rate 
 of interest on the inventoried investment of $1,150,000. That is $40,425 
 per annum, or $13.97 a lamp. This increases the annual cost of each 
 lamp to $90.98. 
 
 Passing over the free water of the city plants, insurance and other 
 items that might be enumerated, it will be evident that Mr. Ellicott's 
 total cost per lamp of $55.93 is increased, by taking into account addi- 
 tional elements of cost that seem to be perfectly just, fair and reasonable, 
 to $90.98. When a manufacturer's profit is added and tlie other missing 
 items are accounted for, it is seen that the central station price of $108 a 
 lamp is not excessive. Mr. Ellicot figures labor, material, maintenance 
 and oflBce salaries. What have been added ? Depreciation (five per cent 
 only, with no account of depreciation in buildings), taxes and interest on 
 investment. The cost of water and insurance is still to be included. 
 
 76
 
 Surely there is nothing unreasonable iu the conchision that the '' true 
 cost" of a municipal arc light in Chicago, tigured on an equitable basis, 
 is $92 a year or more, rather than 85G. 
 
 It is with no desire to indulge iu mere captious criticism that the 
 Western J^lev/rician points out what it believes to be the more rational 
 method of arriving at the cost of municipal arc lighting. Nor is the 
 question of the proprietj- of the citj- lighting its own streets now under 
 discussion. It is perfectly well known that the dei)artmeutof electricity 
 is ably managed and that the city of Chicago has no more honest, capa- 
 ble and zealous officer than Edward B. EUicott. But, considering merely 
 the cost of arc lighting in Chicago, we have endeavored to show that it 
 is fair to include elements of cost other than those given in the report, 
 and that, in consequence, the " true cost," based entirelj^ on the figures 
 given, Is considerably over $90 a lamp. 
 
 CONNEAUT, Ohio, plant, $22,500; operating expenses. $4,022.52; 
 interest at five per cent. $1,125.05; depreciation, $1,125.05 ; taxes. $225 ; 
 sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,000; making $7,497.02, less incomp, 
 !f5,044.G2, and we have $2,45;^, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, 
 costing .0245 per hour, and furnishing 489 candle power per hour for one 
 cent. 
 
 CHAMBERSBTJRG, Pa., plant, $40,000: operating expenses, 
 $14,000; interest at four per cent, $1,C00; depreciation, $2,000; taxes 
 and insurance, $400; sinking fund to paj' bonds, $1,000 ; making $19,000, 
 less income, $9,800, and we have $9,2u0, cost of street lights burned 
 4.000 hours, costing .028 per hour, and furnishing 869 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 COLUMBIA CITY, Ind., plant, $23,500'; coal, $2.10 per ton; 
 operating expenses, $6,500 ; interest at six per cent. $1,410 ; depreciation, 
 $1,175; taxes and insurance. $235 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,175 ; 
 making $10,485, less income, $5,500, and we have $4,985, cost of street 
 lights burned 8,000 hours, costing .0839 per hour, and furnishing 589 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 COUNCIL GROVE. Kan., plant, $7,000; burned lights 1,875 
 hours, costing .0779 per hour, furnishing 154 candle power per hour for 
 one cent. 
 
 CHICOPEE. Mass., plant, $98,950; use 1,200 candle power lamps, 
 costing, as shown l)y Gas and Electric Light Commissioners, $109.74 per 
 year per lamp, burned 8,000 hours, costing .0365 per hour, and furnishing 
 828 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 DECATUR, 111., plant, $50,000; coal, $1.25 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $7,000 ; interest at five per cent, $2,500 ; depreciation at five 
 per cent, $2,500 ; taxes aud insurance, $500 ; making $11,500. cost of 
 street lights burned 2,100 hours, costing .085 per hoiir, aud furnishing 
 571 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 77
 
 In the above, only five per cent is charged for depreciation. The 
 mayor, -when asked regarding the depreciation, answered, "If an allow- 
 ance of ten per cent was made on the cost of the plant to keep it in 
 repair, and another ten per cent on account of depreciation, the charge 
 wonld not be too heavy." 
 
 The local paper in Decatur says : 
 
 ' ' The municipal lighting is a snare and delusion. While the system of 
 book-keeping in the clerk's office shows an annual expense account of 
 $5,458, the actual cost of these lights is about $12,458." 
 
 DETROIT, Midi., is conceded to be the best municipal plant in the 
 United States, and, when the system was adopted, the tax payers were 
 told that the offer made by the private company would be " cut in two," 
 and that laborers would have "better pay and shorter hours." These were 
 the promises and assumptions made to induce the tax payers to consent 
 to the adoption of the system. Experience is a good, but often an 
 expensive teacher, and the people of Detroit are realizing the fact. In 
 1893, the private company offered to make a contract for ten j^ears, at an 
 average price of $102.50 per lamp per year. Those advocating municipal 
 ownership claimed they could " cut this price in two " ; therefore, to do 
 this, they must produce the lights for $51.10 per lamp. The report made 
 by the authorities in 1897 stated that the operating expenses were $G4.19 
 per lamp, and the 1898 report makes operating expenses $51.85. If 
 taxes, insurance, interest at four per cent, and depreciation at only five 
 per cent, were added to the cost as given by the city for operating 
 expenses, it would make the cost for 1897, $106.30, while for 1898 it would 
 be $94.17 per lamp. In above figures, nothing is allowed for a sinking 
 fund ; they have $650,000 in bonds outstanding. It is well known that, 
 with thirty-year bonds, one-thirtieth of the amount must be provided 
 for each j'^ear, and that this item is as much a part of cost as the labor or 
 coal account. In the case of Detroit, $21,666.66 per year must be 
 provided to meet these bonds as they mature. This would add to the 
 cost of lamps in 1897, $13.85 per lamp, making a total for that year 
 $120.21 per lamp, and for 1898 it would add yll.90 per light, making the 
 total for that year, $106.07. It will be seen that cost for 1898 was $12.34 
 less than it was in 1897. How was this reduction accomplished? By 
 j)utting the men on a salary, and not allowing them anything for over 
 time ; also reducing the number of men, and requiring those left not 
 only to do the work of men discharged, but caring for 180 additional 
 lights. 
 
 In 1897 they burned 1,564 arc lamps, and employed 30 men to trim 
 and care for them, while in 1898 they compelled 26 men to trim and care 
 for 1,744 lights ; this caused a strike of the trimmers, and lamps were out 
 for 4,292 hours. In 1897 they employed six engineers and seven firemen, 
 while in 1898 they only had five engineers and six firemen, and in 1897 
 the seven firemen handled 15,082,230 pounds of coal, while in 1898 the 
 six firemen were compelled to handle 17,075,525 pounds of coal, showing 
 that, notwithstanding the business required 2,043,395 pounds more of
 
 coal in 1898 than in 1897, they forced six men not only to handle what 
 seven men handled the j^ear before, but 2,043,395 pound additional, and in 
 1899the8ixmen were compelled to handleS, 184, 200 pounds more coal than 
 was handled by the seven men in 1897. In this way, they reduced the 
 cost per lamp S10.30 in 1898, while they only made a reduction of 82.04 
 in all the other branches. In 1899 they made a reduction of .*•">. 39 per 
 lamp, s3.29 of which was taken from the men's wa<res and 82.10 from the 
 other departments. This shows that nearly all of the reduction for the 
 past three years has been all'ected by takiufj^ it out of its emiiloyes' watres. 
 
 The plant has only been runniujjj since April. 189o. Now the lighting 
 commissioners say some of the apparatus must be changed for larger 
 machines. This means selling the present apparatus as second-hand and 
 old style, which will not bring 50 per cent of its cost. The}' call for an 
 appropriation of 838,000 for this exchange. How much of this is a dead 
 loss ? 
 
 They have charged to depreciation, the past four years, $21,295.11 
 per year Suppose that amount is charged everj' year for 38 years, then 
 you only have 8809.214. while the cost of plant as given is 8813,803, besides 
 no provision is made for a sinking fund to pay the bonds of 8050.000. 
 Sufficient depreciation must be charged so that this fund will equal the 
 cost of {)lant in a certain number of years, and experience has shown 
 that the apparatus will not last over ten or 15 years. 
 
 Cincinnati paj-s a private company 884.90 per lamp per yeai', for a 
 2,000 candle power lamp burned every night all night, and, without 
 assuming any risk or lial)ilit3', procures her lights .f21.17 per lamp less 
 than it costs the citj' of Detroit to produce them under the most favor- 
 able conditions. The tax paj'ers of Detroit were given theory when 
 their plant was installed. Now theory is utterly destroyed by the stern 
 facts of experience. Instead of producing the lights at half the price 
 offered by the private company, the reports show that it has cost an 
 average of 810. ()4 per lamp more than it would have cost if a contract 
 had lieen made with the private companj', and this on the basis of only 
 five per cent for depreciation. 
 
 The Detroit Tritmni' saj's . 
 
 " The city finds itself with an elaborate white elephant on its hands. 
 The people cannot fail to realize that the creation of the new department 
 has simplj' increased the opportunity for more wrangling in the city 
 government and the facility with which private parties ma}' control 
 public affairs to suit themselves." 
 
 I)( Iroit Free Pre/tft says : 
 
 In accordance with his announcement at the recent meeting of the 
 Public Lighting Commission Wednesdaj- evening, William A. Livingstone 
 placed his resignation as a member of the board in the hands of Mayor 
 Maj-bury j-esterday morning. 
 
 While Mr Livingstone refuses absolutely to discuss his action, it is 
 a well known fact among his friends that he has the utmost confidence in 
 the al)ility of Secretary' Ford Starring, and, believing him to be the man 
 for the place, was determined to show his loj-alty by resigning his 
 
 79
 
 commissionership in case Starring shoiild be forced to decline a, 
 reappointment. And so, realizing that the labor element, so long arrayed 
 against Starring, was on the eve of victory, he resigned. 
 
 It is considered probable that Commissioners John Miner and C. H. 
 Kitter will follow Mr. Livingstone's example at an early date. Thus it 
 is seen that the Public Lighting Commission happy family is no longer 
 intact. The annual efforts of the labor organizations, set forth since the 
 lighting plant was established, to obtain a foothold there, have been at 
 last successful. Last fall Commissioner E. H. Fyfe, scenting trouble 
 from afar, tendered his resignation and gracefully withdrew. Other 
 commissioners would have followed him, but held on, hoping that 
 trouble could be averted. 
 
 The initial point of the attacking party was the secretary, whose 
 position they believed to be the keystone to their success. Last year 
 Secretary Starring maintained a ten weeks' fight to retain his position. 
 This year he decided that such a fight was anything but pleasant to him- 
 self, and, to say the least, would be annoying to his friends on the com- 
 mission. He did not regard the position worth all that he and his 
 friends would have to go through to retain it. Last Tuesday he obtained 
 the permission of a majoritj' of the commissioners to call a meeting of 
 the commission, and on Wednesday night they got together. 
 
 SECKET MEETING. 
 
 The meeting was a secret one, and though the ofiice of the commis- 
 sion was besieged by newspaper men, none was permitted entrance, or 
 given the slightest idea of what was going on. 
 
 It was learned yesterday, however, that Secretary Starring notified 
 the commissioners that, rather than subject them to the annoyance they 
 had gone through in the past in electing him, he would withdraw his 
 name from the race for the secretaryship. While some of the commis- 
 sioners were ready to stand by the secretary, it looked as if there 
 would be a tie vote of Commissioners Ritter. Miner and Livingstone for, 
 and Commissioners Simons, Ingram and Carhartt against. Starring, 
 therefore, insisted on withdrawing his name. 
 
 CARHAETT'S IDEAS. 
 
 Commissioner Carhartt embraced the opportunity to say that he was 
 thoroughly imbued with the idea that the only way to run a business was 
 in harmony with the rules and regulations of organized labor, and that, 
 as he represented that class as a commissioner, he would do everything 
 in his power to unionize the plant in the fullest acceptance of the word. 
 He said that he believed that not onlj^ should all employes belong to 
 unions, but that the union label should be prominent on everything, and 
 that all supplies should be purchased under the approval of labor 
 organizations. 
 
 The other commissioners had but little to say, remarking that such 
 a topic was inopportune. One commissioner, however, expressed his 
 disapproval of the plan. 
 
 80
 
 stareixg's statement. 
 
 Secretary Starring said last nio^ht : 
 
 " I foresaw a repetitiou of the tight that was made against me hist 
 year. At that time certain charges were made against me in behalf of 
 organized labor, setting forth that 1 was antagonistic to it. The charges 
 ■were not proved before the commissioners, and I was reappointed. 
 
 " There are, however, half a dozen men, who were prominent in the 
 strike against the commission by the trimmers in April, !8;)8, who, failing 
 to get emploj-ment, have been acting as agitators, and kept the sentiment 
 against me stirred up. It is well known that I am not antagonistic to 
 organized labor, and I would be willing, if intrusted with the emploj'- 
 ment of labor at the lighting plant, to give preference to union men, all 
 things being etpial, and the business of the city as well subserved. 
 
 "I have maintained that the position of the commission has been 
 right— that the members hud no authority to delegate any of the powers 
 vested in them, as representatives of the city of Detroit, to any person 
 or organization. The taking of such power from the commission and 
 placing it in the control of organized labor is a question that should be 
 passed on by the voters at the polls, in a manner similar to that author- 
 izing the issuance of city bonds, etc. 
 
 CARHARTT REPBESENTS ORGANIZED LABOR. 
 
 " The mayor favors organized labor at the public lighting plant, and 
 appointed Commissioner Carhartt, the representative of such organiza- 
 tions. Mr. Carhartt's position in the matter is set forth in the following 
 extract from a letter from him to me, dated December 11, 181)9 : 
 
 " ' Of course, you are aware, Mr. Starring, that my position on the 
 Public Lighting Commission is a unique ore. My own personality does 
 not enter into the matter at all. I was appointed to represent organized 
 labor, and, while no promises have been made or asked, the wishes of 
 organized labor, so long as they are compatible with what I believe is to 
 be for the best interests of all concerned, will be recognized.' 
 
 " With other commissioners in harmony with Mr. Carhartt's views, 
 as I learned, for the first time, at the meeting Wednesday night," con- 
 tinued Mr. Starring, " and with the probability of a number of my old 
 associates being deposed, because of objections from organized labor, 
 the position of secretary would have been an unpleasant one, and I am 
 more than ever satistied with my refusal to be a candidate for the 
 position." • 
 
 NO ONE SEEMED GLAD. 
 
 A visit to the lighting plant yesterday found groups of employes 
 discussing the new condition of affairs. No one was found who expressed 
 gladness at the prospect of having the plant unionized. In fact, it was 
 discovered that at least ten of the workmen had withdrawn from the 
 electrical workers' union during the last year, for reasons entirely 
 personal between them and the union. Some of these did not wish their 
 names mentioned, l)ut said freely that they were blacklisted by the 
 
 81 
 (6)
 
 union, and in time would, at the request of the union, be forced from 
 their positions to make room for more loyal members of the union. 
 
 EXTRA EXPENSE PROBABLE. 
 
 One of the trimmers said it was all off with the introduction of the 
 long burning inclosed arc lamp, and that the force of trimmers would 
 soon be increased by about ten men, adding to the expense of that 
 department over $7,000 per year. This is one of the most expensive 
 departments of the plant, and an attempt at economy in it two years ago 
 was the cause of the trimmers' strike. 
 
 Public Policy says : 
 
 TRUE AND ENTIRE COSTS NOT STATED. 
 
 An examination of the report by intelligent but unsympathetic eyes 
 disclosed the fact that the cost given as the cost per lamp of the public 
 lighting did not include the payment of interest an the $600,000 of bonds 
 issued on behalf of the plant, a provision for a sinking fund to retire the 
 bonds, proper allowances for depreciation, insurance against accidents of 
 any kind, taxes relinquished and for taxes collected and invested in the 
 plant to cover excess cost of construction. Gradually, as the years have 
 passed, some of these omissions have been recognized and a partial pro- 
 vision for these items has been estimated for and included in a theoreti- 
 ■cal statement of the cost of lighting. We b&j theoretical, because the 
 amounts estimated have never been withdrawn from the general fund 
 and placed in a separate fund devoted to the purpose for which the esti- 
 mate was made. 
 
 TEE FIRST BREAK. 
 
 The theory of getting something for nothing by getting rid of highly 
 paid corporation officials soon began to produce its legitimate results. 
 Business men with large interests of their own to manage soon, found 
 they could not afford to subject themselves to the demands made upon 
 their time by the interests of the public lighting commission. They dis- 
 covered that they were not dealing with a subject calling for the sacri- 
 fices demanded by patriotism or ethical sentiments. They found they had 
 only a plain business proposition to deal with, was to show by the muni- 
 cipal ownership and operation^jof the public lighting plant that they could 
 save money for the tax payers. They found that one important item in the 
 saving was their own work done for nothing. They found, in order that 
 tax payers might get something for nothing, someone had to give some- 
 thing for nothing, and that someone was themselves. They tired of 
 their task and one by one they dropped out of the commission. 
 
 A BUSINESS PROPOSITION. 
 
 Working for nothing or working for less than the service will com- 
 mand elsewhere is not a sound business proposition. The commission 
 and Mr. Dow had to meet this contingency. It was met by Mr. Dow 
 choosing to become one of the highly paid corporation officials, the 
 
 82
 
 niiinicipnl enterprise was iutended to destroy, rather than to remain a 
 poorly paid public servant, beset by the criticisms and claims of num- 
 berless politicians, whose only idea of the service of the public lij^hting 
 plant was its usefulness as a '" pie counter." 
 
 SECRETARY STARRING AND THE TAXPAYERS. 
 
 Mr. Dow was succeeded by Mr. Starring, who has fought with a sin- 
 cerity and ability in value far beyond the compensation he received to 
 demonstrate the economic and financial efficiency of the Detroit public 
 lighting plant. His efforts were for the benefit of tax payers. But each 
 individual taxpaj'er was in business for himself — conducting his business 
 on business principles, taking care to get full value for every service he 
 rendered or commoditj' parted with. They were not giving something for 
 nothing. Their separate individual interest ill the public lighting plant, or 
 what it was possible for it to save for them, was so small they could not af- 
 ford to give their valuable time to keep themselves correctlj^ informed as to 
 the diffiiculties met with in its management and the results. They valued 
 the time it would cost them to know the merits of the contentions between 
 Mr. Starring and his opponents and to sustain him worth more than what 
 they could save by it, and, as they do not think it a good business proposi- 
 tion to give a greater for a lesser value, they left him to meet the fate that 
 has now arrived. 
 
 ALIi HOPE OF SUCCESS GONE. 
 
 All hope for the Detroit public lighting plant ever l)ecoming a suc- 
 cessful business proposition must now be abandoned. When a plant is 
 operated for the benefit of tax-eaters, taxpayers become slaves. The 
 only public benefit that can be derived from the present condition of the 
 Detroit public lighting plant is that of a warning to other cities contem- 
 plating such enterprises to abandon them before it is too late. This is 
 the warning given by Boston's municipal manufacturing industries to 
 Pittsburg and all American municipalities. It is the warning given by 
 the closing of the Chicago electrical repair shops some two years ago. 
 
 There has not been a year during its existence that the jmblic light- 
 ing of Detroit supplied from its own ))lant^ha8 not cost tax payers more 
 than the same service would have cost them under contract with a pri- 
 vate corporation. There will never be such a year. The best disposition 
 the cit3' of Detroit can make of this plant is to follow the example of 
 Philadelphia and lease it to a private corporation to be operated under 
 Contract. 
 
 DANVERS, Mass., plant. .$45,174 ; use a 1,200 candle power lamp, 
 costing, as stated by the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners of the state, 
 $55. 87, burned 1,743 hours, costing .083 per hour, and furnishing 375 can- 
 dle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 DANVILLE, Va., plant, i!!l8,000 ; Vmilding and water power leased 
 of private company for which they pay $15 per j'ear per horse power ; op- 
 erating expenses, $5,000 ; interest at 4 per cent, $720 ; depreciation, 
 
 S3
 
 $900 ; taxes, $180, making $6,800, less income, $1,200, and we have $5,600 
 cost of street lights burned 4,000 hours, costing .0155 per hour, and 
 furnishing 774 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The building in which their dynamos were located burned, destroy- 
 ing everything and entailing a loss of $9,000 and no insurance. This 
 item is not included in above calculation of cost. The superintendent's 
 salary is charged to the general expense account and not in the electric 
 expenses. 
 
 DAWSON, Ga., plant, $12,000 ; coal, $2.80 per ton ; operating ex- 
 penses, $3,500 ; interest at 4 per cent, $480 ; depreciation, $600 ; taxes 
 and insurance, $120 ; sinking fund to meet bonds, $500 ; total, $5,200, as 
 cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0464 per hour, and 
 furnishing 258 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 DUNKIRK, N. Y., plant, $25,000 ; coal, $1.30 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $5,000; interest at 4 per cent, $1,000 ; depreciation, $1,250 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $250, making $7,500, cost of street lights burned 
 3,000 hours, costing .0263 per hour, and furnishing 760 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 ELBERTON,Ga. .plant, $22,000; water power; operating expenses, 
 $2,700; interest at 6 per cent, $1,320; depreciation, $1,100; taxes and 
 insurance. $200 ; sinking fund for bonds, $600, making $5,920, less in- 
 come, $2,000, and we have $3,920, as cost of street lights burned 2,000 
 hours, costing .035 per hour, and furnishing 342 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 ELGIN. 111., plant, $27,000; coal, $2.00 per ton; operating ex- 
 penses, $13,000; interest at 5 per cent, $1,350; depreciation, $1,350; 
 taxes and insurance, $270, making $15,970, cost of street lights ".burned 
 2,500 hours, costing 0316 per hour, and furnishing 632 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. The salary of the electrician' is charged to general 
 expenses and not to the lighting account. After using plant six years, 
 they had to expend $10,000 to put it in shape to do their business. 
 
 EASTON, Pa., plant, $45,000 ; operating expenses, $12,000 ; interest 
 at four per cent, $1,800; depreciation, $2,250; taxes and insurance, 
 $450 ; making $16,500, cost of street lights burned 3,800 hours, costing 
 .0307 per hour, and furnishing 651 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The mayor says : 
 
 " In Easton the cost is claimed not to be over $87 per lamp, but both 
 the city treasurer and controller claim that the cost is far in excess of 
 those figures." 
 
 The Express says : 
 
 " The same number of lights as now used can be had of a private 
 company for $8,000, or a saving to the city of $4,000 a year. The fact is 
 the cost is excessive, and the service abominable." 
 
 84:
 
 This became so oppressive that a resolution was introduced iuto the 
 council calling for bids from private companies, and, of course, if 
 accepted, it would shut down the municipal plant. 
 
 ESTHER VILLE, Iowa, plant, $;8,000 ; coal, 82.50 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, $2,500; interest at six per cent, $480; depreciation, 
 $400; taxes and insurance, |S0 ; sinking fund for bonds, $400 ; making 
 $3,800, less income of •*2,800, and we have Sl.OdO, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .0271 per hour, and furnishing 442 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 EMMONS, Pa., plant, $2,600 ; lights burned 2,190 hours, costing 
 .0511 per hour, and furnishing 391 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 FREMONT, Neb., plant, $25,000; coal, $3.35 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $7,000; interest at six per cent, $1,500: depreciation, $1,250 ; 
 taies and insurance, $250 ; making $9,900, less income, $5,000, and we 
 have $4,900, as cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0278 per 
 hour, and furnishing 431 caudle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 FAYETTE, Mo., plant, $12,000; coal, $2 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $3,500; interest at four per cent, $480: depreciation, $G00 : 
 taxes and insurance, $120 ; sinking fund, $600 ; making $5,300, as cost of 
 street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .086 per hour, and furnishing 
 232 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 FAIRFIELD, Iowa, plant, $7,000; coal, $2.25 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $1,279.71 ; interest at five per cent. $350 ; depreciation, $350 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $70; making $2, 049. 71, as cost of street lights burned 
 1,954 hours, costing .052 per hour, furnishing 384 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 FULTON, Mo., plant, $16,000; coal, $1.75 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $4,000 : interest at five per cent, $830 ; depreciation, $830 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $100 ; sinking fund to paj' bonds, $1,200 ; making 
 $7,020, less income, $5,000, and we have $2,020, cost of street lights 
 burned 3.000 hours, costing .039 per hour, and furnishing 512 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 FORT WORTH, Texas, plant, $44,000; coal, $3.10 per ton; oper- 
 ating expenses, $5,624.15; interest at six per cent, $3,040; depreciation, 
 $2,200 ; taxes and insurance, $440; sinking fund to pay bonds, $2,200; 
 making $13,104.15, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0364 
 per hour, and furnishing 329 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 FREDONIA, N. Y., plant, $16,000: coal, $2.00 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $2,750 ; interest at five per cent, $800 ; depreciation, $800 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $150 ; making $4,500, as cost of street lights burned 
 1,500 hours, costing .0384 per hour, and furnishing 520 caudle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 So
 
 FREDERICK, Md., plant, $17,000; coal, $2.50 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $6,000"; interest at four per cent, $680 ; depreciation, $850 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $170 ; making $7,700, cost of street lights burned 
 2,200 hours, costing .0443 per hour, and furnishing 451* candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 GRANVILLE, Ohio, plant, $6,000 ; coal, $1.25 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $1,400; interest at six per cent, $360; depreciation, $300; 
 taxes and insurance, $50 ; sinking fund for bonds, $300 ; making $2,410, 
 cost of street lights burned 1,320 hours, costing .0454 per hour, and 
 furnishing 440 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 GRAFTON. W. Va, The following report was made to the mayor 
 and common council, and purporting to show the entire cost to the tax 
 payers of operating 94 2,000-candle power arc lights every night and all 
 night. 
 
 To the Honorable Mayor and Council of the Citu of Grafton: 
 
 Gentlemen :— I beg to submit this report of the city electric light 
 plant from May 1, 1899, to December 31, 1899— eight months. 
 
 Repairs on engine, $4.75 ; repairs on dynamo, $1,10 ; oil, water, and 
 packing, -^62.20; carbons, $330.68; fuel, $182.00; tools, $15.83; new 
 lamps, $32.00; labor, $54.64; material for lamps, $79.64; lamp trimmer, 
 $350.00 ; miscellaneous hauling, $13.24; total for operating eight months, 
 $1,129.45. 
 
 A local paper there, which advocates municipal ownership, publishes 
 this report, and comments as follows: 
 
 "The report is an interesting document. It gives the public a 
 detailed statement, showing the exact cost for the past eight months to 
 be the insignificant sum of $1,129.45. 
 
 *' We feel proud of the showing thus made, and believe the cost per 
 light for Grafton is less than in any other city in the United States. 
 
 "Be it remembered right here that the item charged under head of 
 labor, $54.64, was paid for repairs to line." 
 
 We give this report as a sample of many sent out purporting to show 
 cost of lights. 
 
 The items show that they used an engine and dynamo; that they 
 used $62.20 of oil, etc. ; but not a cent is charged for a man to run this 
 engine and dynamo all night every night in the year. Therefore, we 
 must infer that it ran itself, stopping and starting automatically ; that 
 the oil used walked into the cups without assistance ; that the $182 worth 
 of fuel did not require any help in placing it in the furnaces ; that the 
 superintendent made no charges for his services ; that the five per cent 
 interest upon the $10,000 which plant cost paid itself, notwithstanding 
 they had agreed to pay it ; that there was no depreciation, no taxes or 
 insurance. Every one knows that nearly all the charges and 
 expenses of the electric plant were charged to some other department, 
 but the public are told that the above account covers all the costs of 
 producing the lights, and then compare the cost of lights made in this 
 
 86
 
 way with prices of private companies. Does it benefit the tax payers, 
 and why, if jiaities wish to give the facts, are not all the expenses and 
 charsjes made pul)lic and placed where they belong ? 
 
 GRAND LEDGE, Mich., plant, 810,000 ; burned 1,400 hours, cost- 
 ing .11 cents per hour, and furnishing 181 candle power per hour for one 
 cent. 
 
 In this calculation plant is credited with all income received. 
 
 GREENWICH, Ohio, plant. $10,000; coal, !|1.35 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, .'51,7il2.(J0 ; interest at live per cent, 8500; depreciation, 8500; 
 taxes and insurance, 8100; sinking fund for bonds, 8500; making 
 83,302.00, less income, 81.200, and we have 82,192.60, as cost of street 
 lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .0GG4 per hour, and furnishing 301 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 GALVESTON, Texas., plant, 865,000; coal, ^5 p^r ton ; operating 
 expenses, 825,000; interest at five per cent, 83,250 ; depreciation, 83,250 ; 
 taxes and insurance, 8050; making 832,800, cost of street lights burned 
 3,000 hours, costing .034 per hour, and furnishing 588 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 GREENFIELD, lud.. plant, $30,000 ; natural gas ; operating ex- 
 penses, 84,000; interest at six per cent, $1,800 ; depreciation, $1,500 ; 
 taxes, 8150; .sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,500 ; making 88,950. cost of 
 street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .05 per hour, and furnishing 400 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 GRIFFIN, Ga.. plant, $30,000; operating expenses, $5,500 ; interest 
 at five per cent, 81,500 ; depreciation, 81.500 ; taxes and insurance, $300; 
 sinking fund to pa^' bonds, 81.500 ; making 810,300, less income, 86,300, 
 and we have !f4,000, cost of street lights burned 2,200 hours, costing .0343 
 per hour, and furnishing 583 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 GOSHEN, Ind., plant, $24,000; coal, 82.95 per ton; operating 
 expenses, •'f4,500 ; interest at six per cent, $1,440; depreciation, $1,200; 
 taxes and insurance, .$240 ; making $7,380, cost of street lights burned 
 2,400 hours, costing .0240 per hour, and furnishing 813 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 HOLYOKE, Mass. In December, 1896, the city council voted to 
 establish a municipal plant, and on January 1, 1897, voted the second 
 time, as required by law. 
 
 The Holyoke Water Power company tiled with the citj' clerk a 
 schedule of its gas plant and its electric plant, and offered to sell to the 
 city the whole of both plants for .$1,000,000. The company also offered 
 to sell by lease in f uch form as is ordinarily used for such conveyance 
 by it in Holyoke, one-half of one mill power of water to be used in con- 
 nection with the gas plant, also sixteen now permanent twenty-four-hour 
 
 67
 
 mill powers of water to be drawn from the first level canal, and used in 
 connection with the electric plant. The sum paid for rent of said mill 
 powers to be $1,500 a year for each and everj' one of said sixteen and 
 one-half mill powers, payable in semi-annual payments. 
 
 On January 13 a special committee, consisting of the mayor and 
 three members of the city council, was constituted, with the duty to 
 examine the gas and electric Kght plants and ascertain the present value 
 of the same, also to confer with the officers of said company and deter- 
 mine, if possible, a price for such plants as will be mutually satisfactory. 
 
 The special committee procured experts, who, with the permission 
 of the company, were to examine and value the gas and electric plants. 
 They could not agree, and the proposition was rejected. 
 
 The Water Power company, on March 5, made application to the 
 supreme judicial court to compel the city to take both its gas and electric 
 plants, and to pay for same in accordance with the offer of the company 
 as given above, and in compliance with the law. 
 
 Another committee was appointed by the council to make further 
 examination. 
 
 This committee reported in June that they had hired two gas and 
 two electric non-resident experts, at a fixed price per day, to examine the 
 plants and testify concerning them before the commission appointed 
 by the court ; they had also engaged a number of architects, civil 
 engineers and contractors to make plans and estimates of the two plants ; 
 that the work of these parties had been completed, and was in the hands 
 of the city's legal counsel ; that the expenses of the committee had 
 been $8,291.67. 
 
 The above action was taken in 1898. 
 
 In April, 1899, the aldermen received the following communication : 
 
 To the Board of Aldermen : 
 
 Gentlemen : — At a meeting of the Manufacturers' Association the 
 following vote was passed unanimously : 
 
 That, in the present financial situation, it would be disadvantageous 
 to the city of Holyoke to acquire the gas and electric plants of the 
 Holyoke Water Power Company, and the Manufacturers' Association 
 recommends that the board of aldermen postpone the taking of those 
 plants, for a period of five years at least, and that it will make a contract 
 with the Holj''oke Water Power Company on the best possible terms. 
 
 At the May meeting of the aldermen it was ordered, That the com- 
 mittee on municipal lighting be and they are hereby ordered and 
 instructed to confer with the city solicitor and, acting on his advice, to 
 make some arrangement, if possible, with the Holyoke Water Power 
 Company to defer the taking of the gas and electric lighting plants of 
 said company for a period of five years, provided the rights of the city 
 are fully protected. 
 
 Ordered further, That the said committee be and they are hereby 
 empowered, in case said matter is deferred, to make a contract with the 
 
 8S
 
 Holyoke Water Power Company for furuishiriEf j^as and electric lights 
 and power to the citj' of Holyoke for a term of five years. 
 
 The committee reported and recommended that the following 
 proposition be sent to said company, to be entered into by the said coni- 
 pauj' and the city of Holyoke, subject to consent given or satisfaction 
 thereof by the legislature of the state. 
 
 That a fifteen year contract be made for public lighting at the 
 following rates : 21~> to 800 lights, 1,200 candle power, each *8o ; 800 to 
 400 lights, 1,200 candle power, each s88.8oJ ; over 400.1ights, 1,200 candle 
 l)ower, each $75. After the expiration of each successive five j-ears from 
 the date of the contract, the city mav demand and have a submission to 
 arl)itration for reducing the price below that fixed in the contract, in 
 case the cost of manufacture or distribution should be reduced by new 
 discoveries, or inventions, or progress in the art in successful commercial 
 operation. 
 
 It was voted that the Committee on Municipal Lighting be and 
 they are hereby authorized and instructed to oflfer the terms 
 proposed in their report to the Holyoke Water Power Company, and in 
 case said terms are accepted, the board of public works and mayor are 
 hereby authorized to enter into a contract with the said companj' on the 
 said terms, and to petition the legislature of the state for permission to 
 make said contract binding, and for a discontinuance of said suit. 
 
 Here we have the experience of a citj' who spent thoiisands of dol- 
 lars over municipal ownership, by investigations and committees, and 
 after the private company had placed their plants at the disposal of the 
 city, thej' wanted to withdraw from the plan which their action under 
 the state law compelled them to carry out, but when the city oflicers 
 learned the facts regarding these plants they were willing to make a 
 fifteen-year contract at $85 per lamp, with water power. This proposi- 
 tion on the part of the city was made to the private company after they 
 bad employed four experts, besides architects and contractors to give 
 them the facts regarding cost of electric lighting. 
 
 HENDERSON, Minn., plant, $0,000 ; coal, $4.00 per ton : operat- 
 ing expenses, SI, 700 ; interest at 6 per cent, $3G0 ; depreciation, $800 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $G0 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $300, making 
 $2,660, less income, $2,000. and we have $600, cost of street lights, being 
 .0883 per hour, and furnishing 240 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HINGHAM, Mass., plant, $24,413; operating expenses, $10,194.65; 
 interest at 4 per cent, $976.52 ; depreciation, $1,220.65 ; taxes, $384, mak- 
 ing $12,775.82. less income, $5,302.33, and we have $7,473.49, cost of 
 street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .0479 per hour, and furnishing 250 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HANNIBAL, Mo., plant, $62,000 ; coal, $1.55 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $15,540; interest at 5 per cent, $3,000; depreciation, $3,100; 
 taxes and insurance, $620 ; sinking fund to pay ^bonds, $2,400 ; making 
 
 SO
 
 $24,660, less income from incandescents and power, $13,202, and we have 
 $11,458, as cost of street lights burned 2,500 honrs, costing .0458 per hour, 
 and furnishing 436 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HUDSON, Mass., plant, $45,273 ; cost of a 2,500 candle-power lamp, 
 as made by the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners, was $132.08. 
 burned 1,053 hours, costing .0799 per hour, and furnishing 250 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HULL, Mass., plant, $119,367; use 25 candle power incandescent 
 for streets, costing, as stated by the Gas and Electric Light Commis- 
 sioners, $60.18 per year, burned 1,387 hours, costing .043 per hour'for 
 incandescent lights. 
 
 HUBBARD, Ohio, plant, $6,000; coal, $1.65 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $2,200 ; interest at 5 per cent, $300 ; depreciation, $300 ; taxes 
 and insurance, $60; sinking fund to pay bonds, $300, making $3,160, 
 less income, $2,200, and we have $960. cost of street lights burned 1,260 
 hours, costing .038 per hour, and furnishing 526 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 HAMILTON, Ohio, had a mayor who was an advocate of municipal 
 ownership, and, in his report, he said, "He had made an investigation, 
 and, in some cases, the figures show that the city could get its lights for 
 nothing, making enough out of the profits on general electric lighting 
 business to provide all the arc lights required free of expense." This 
 mayor's statement is the visionary and theoretical part of the plan. 
 What does the practical part or real experience show alter the plant has 
 been established? 
 
 The city owns water works started in 1884 and cost $315,000. In 
 1889 they started a gas plant costing $160,000, and an electric light plant 
 costing $100,000 was started in 1895. This amount of |575,000 was raised 
 by selling city bonds. The city clerk says : 
 
 ' ' The threat to shut down the electric light plant is because they are 
 out of funds. Hamilton, of all the cities in the United States, has been 
 most afflicted with the municipal ownership craze, and now, having its 
 fill on theory, is reaping the results, and we must bear and grin as best 
 we can under adverse circumstances. 
 
 " But, on the condition that now confronts us, we ought to try and 
 inject a little common sense into the municipal cranium, and try and 
 evolve some scheme whereby we can kite along for the present, and 
 perhaps realize some of the fond expectations that were held out in the 
 past. 
 
 "We are deluded in the belief that we have cheap water, gas and 
 electric light. When we add to these luxuries the fact that we have 
 so raised the rate of municipal taxation until it has become burdensome, 
 and then compare with other cities of our size, we find that we are not as 
 well oflf as we think we are. 
 
 90
 
 " We are taxed to pay the interest on the water works bonds, as well 
 as to provide for their redemption. We are taxed to \my the interest of 
 the gns works and the electric li^'ht plant, as well us to provide for the 
 redemption of bonds, and we are also taxed for the {jurpose (»f li^'litiu^ 
 the cort)oration, which is nothing more than ilouble taxation. This is a 
 curions situation, but is nevertheless true. 
 
 " While the water tax levy is up to the limit, it fails to pay the 
 interest and bonds falling due, and the same may be said of the gas and 
 electric light levy, and thej' also barely pay the interest charges, with no 
 bonds yet falling due. When they do commence to fall due, how they 
 are going to be paid is a serious question. 
 
 " We should realize that the annual interest charge for water, gas 
 works and electric light is .*28.0U0, with slO.OOO water works bonds falling 
 due each year, making a total charge of $88,000, which must be paid 
 annually, and no assistance is rendered by either of said plants in helinng 
 to pay said charges : it looks like the city is carrying a heavy burden. 
 * * * * The city has reached the condition that comes to every 
 individual who reaches out beyond his means. 
 
 '■ Maturity comes and protest has been avoided during the past year 
 by using heroic remedies, liefuuding bonds as they fall due may be, in 
 the opinion of many, good financiering, but that does not pay the debt 
 or discharge the interest, which creeps along just the same as the bonds 
 fall due. and which must be paid. 
 
 '■ Hamilton is being devoured whole by its interest charges. During 
 the coming year the interest owing by the citj' will amount to the sum 
 of 843,085 ; bonds falling due $48,000, or a total of $i)l,12r), or nearly 90 
 per cent of the entire revenue of the city will be necessary for meeting 
 these charges. We have had theory long enough, and we must meet the 
 .condition." 
 
 A correspondent writing from Hamilton says : 
 
 " The question of closing down the electric light plant is provo"king 
 much talk. To be practically thrown into utter darkness again all on 
 account of mismanagement is not relished by those who pay the high tax 
 rate to keep things moving along. The issuing of S15.U00 worth of bonds 
 to operate the plant is more than the people can stand, especially when the 
 light plant has already cost ^oO.OOO more than it should have cost the 
 tax payers." Still the trustees announced that they would be compelled 
 to shut down for want ot funds. 
 
 The mayor gave the theoretical i)art of the plan. Here we have the 
 actual or real experience after the plant has been established. Still later 
 developments also show how such things end. 
 
 The city not being able to meet its obligations. Judge Crane, an 
 attorney, filed a petition for a receiver for the city of Hamilton, with the 
 following i)leadiug. and alleging ten grounds in support of the api>lica- 
 cation. viz. : 
 
 That the city is on the verge of bankruptcy. 
 
 That the city has refused to paj' just debts which are a year overdue. 
 
 That the city has defaulted upon various bonded debts. 
 
 til
 
 That the credit of the city grows worse each raonth. 
 
 That, through the extravagance of those in authority, more money 
 is expended than the resources of the city will permit. 
 
 That the city is more severely taxed than any other in Ohio. 
 
 That large amounts of the city funds are misappropriated by those in 
 authority. 
 
 That the city authorities do not take care of the city's finances 
 according to law. 
 
 That the several funds are now depleted ; that the schools cannot be 
 kept open more than a month ; that the street fuiids are exhausted ; that 
 there is no money to keep the library open for more than two months ; 
 that the city is unable to light its parks or public places, or to remove 
 garbage, or clean the streets, and is otherwise is great danger of bank- 
 ruptcy. 
 
 The city clerk claims they can pay all lawful obligations, and says: 
 
 " If these plants can be so managed as to pay the interest charge 
 alone from out of their earnings, we could cut the levy $3.50 on each 
 $1,000. 
 
 " Of the $14.20 of taxes collected on each $1,000 for city purposes, 
 $8.10 goes to pay interest and bonds, leaving but $6.10 for the other 
 needs of the cit3^ The city has never yet defaulted in the payment of 
 any interest or the payment of its bonds. 
 
 '' But the next ten years are going to be hard ones on the tax payers, 
 by reason of direct assessments, but the city has assets for every 
 liability." 
 
 This means that tax payers have got to consent to assessments to 
 meet the citj^'s liabilities or lose their property, for every man's property 
 in the city is mortgaged for these city debts. 
 
 E. B. Kogers, being interviewed, said : 
 
 " I think it was right. There is not a department in the city that is 
 not in the rut. I think that one or three men, under instruction of the 
 court, should be appointed to take charge of affairs. Everything costs 
 us double, it seems." 
 
 Judge Crane said the bill had been marked O. K. by the committee 
 on claims, and that the city had refused to pay it. Whether or not we 
 get a receiver, he said, we wish to call a halt to the bonded indebtedness 
 and the reckless expenditures, which are continually increasing. 
 
 The bonds of the city of Hamilton, in total, are $877,453, and only 
 about 18,000 population. Here we have the direct results of a munic- 
 ipality going into a business enterprise. If the city had not adopted the 
 plan of municipal ownership it would not stand in the position it does 
 to-day. 
 
 The Hamilton, Ohio, News says : 
 
 " By the way in which the coimcil seems determined to award the 
 contracts for the new city electric light plant, the cost of the plant will run 
 up to about $101,000. The people were assured originally that the plant 
 •would only cost $50,000, and a great array of figures was presented to 
 prove this fact." 
 
 92
 
 HENDERSON. Ky., plaut. 833,000; coal, 7:5 cents per ton; oper- 
 ating expenses, >:().(;il0.1>3 ; interest at five per cent, ^IjG-'iO: depreciation, 
 $1,650; taxes nucl insurance, S300 : niakincr *10,2".tO, cost of street lijibts 
 burned 2.000 hours, costing .0311 per Lour, and furnishing G43 caudle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HAMILTON. N. Y.. phint, 830,000; coal. *3. 10 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, 84,000 ; interest at four percent, $1,200; depreciation, Sl.SOO; 
 taxes and insurance, yloO ; sinking fund for bonds, 8500 ; making 
 87,350, less income, 82,500, and we have 84,850, as cost of street lights 
 burned 2,200 hours, costing .044 per hour, and furnishing 272 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HIGGINSVILLE, Mo., plant, 810.000 ; coal, 81.80 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses. 84,800 ; interest at six per cent, 8060 ; depreciation. 8800; 
 taxes and insurance, 8160; sinking fund for bonds, 8650 ; making $7,370, 
 less income, §4,500. and we have $2,870. as cost of street lights burned 
 1,500 hours, costing .0444 per hour, and furnishing 270 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 HERINGTON, Kan., plant. $28,000; burned 1,825 hours, costing 
 .14 per hour, and furnishing 130 caudle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HOLLAND, Mich., plant, $4,000; operating expenses, 80,500; 
 interest at four per cent, 81.600 ; depreciation, 82,000 ; taxes and insur- 
 ance, 8400 ; making 813,500, less income, $8,500, and we have $5,000. cost 
 of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0416 per hour, and furnishing 
 480 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HERKIMER. N. Y.. plant. $18,600 ; coal. $2.50 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, 83.433.15 ; interest at four per cent, $744 ; depreciation, 8!»30 ; 
 taxes and insurance, 8105; sinking fund for bonds, 8700: making 85.912, 
 cost of street lights burned 3.204 hours, costing .0256 per hour, and 
 furnishing 781 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HIGH POINT. N. C, plant, 813,000 ; coal, $4.10 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, 82,200 ; interest at six per cent, 8780 ; depreciation, 8650 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $130 ; making $3,760, less income, $1,500. and' we 
 have $2,260, cost of street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .0302 per 
 hour, and furnishing 307 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 HUNTINGTON. Ind., plant, $15,000; lights burned 2.100 hours, 
 costing .0401 per hour, and furnishing 408 candle power per hour for oue 
 cent. 
 
 INDIANOLA, Iowa, plant, $25,362.45; coal, 81.20 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, 85,100 ; interest at five per cent, 81.268. 12 ; depreciation, 
 $1,268.12; taxes and water rent, 8253.62; sinking fund to pay bonds, 
 $1,000; making $8,889.86, less income. $3,873.34, and we have 85,016,53, 
 
 93
 
 cost of 135 16-candle power incandescent street lights, being $37.15 per 
 lamp per year, burned on moonlight schedule, until midnight. 
 
 JACKSONVILLE, Fla., plant, $150,000; operating expenses, 
 $38,039.10; interest at five per cent, $7,500; depreciation, $7,500; taxes 
 and insurance, $1,500; sinking fund to pay bonds, $(),000; making 
 $60,539, less income, $45,569, and we have $14,970, as cost of street lights 
 burned 4,000 hours, costing .0233 per hour, and furnishing 858 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 An action was brought against the city for damages caused to an 
 individual, and the United States court awarded $1,500 to the plaintiff. 
 
 JOHNSON, Vt., plant, $7,000; water power, operating expenses, 
 $600 ; interest at 4 per cent, $280 ; depreciation, $350 ; taxes and insur- 
 ance, $70 ; sinking fund for payment of bonds, $300. making $1,600, less 
 income, $1,100, and we have $500, cost of incandescent street lights 
 burned 1,400 hours. 
 
 JACKSON, Ohio, plant, $20,000 ; operating expenses, $6,000 ; in- 
 terest at 4 per cent, $800; depreciation, $1,000; taxes and insurance, 
 $200; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,000, making $9,000, less income, 
 $4,500, and we have $4,500, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, cost- 
 ing .0375 per hour, and furnishing 533 candle power per hour for one 
 cent. 
 
 One citizen stated that he had 128 incandescent lights, and that they 
 only cost him $6.22 a month, being .0487 per lamp per month. Another 
 claimed that the cost to him of 18 incandescents was five cents per 
 month, the other tax payers being assessed to makeup the loss caused 
 bj' such business. 
 
 JACKSONVILLE, 111., plant, $19,650; coal, $1.74 per ton; oper- 
 ating expenses, $7,000 ; interest at 5 per cent, $982 ; depreciation. $982 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $196, making $9,160, cost of street lights burned 
 2,000 hours, costing .027 per hour, and furnishing 740 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 JAMESTOWN, N. Y., plant, $80,000; coal, $1.45 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, $20,228.09 interest at 4 per cent, $3,200 ; depreciation, 
 $4,000 ; taxes, $1,794.40 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $6,200, making 
 $35,422.49, less income, $8,264.39, and we have $27,158.10 cost of street 
 lights burned 4,000 hours, costing .0229 per hour, and furnishing 524 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The mayor said to a committee from Middletown, N. Y., that they 
 "are engaged in commercial lighting to some extent, enough so that the 
 city controls the price charged for lighting both by electric and gas 
 plants. This branch of the lighting department is not only profitable 
 to the municipality, but it is a great source of satisfaction to the con- 
 sumer." The following action, taken by the citizens of Jamestown, does 
 not appear to confirm the mayor's statement : 
 
 94
 
 The council appointed a committee to investigate the municipal elec- 
 tric plant, and to decide upon the question of selling the commercial 
 parts of the plant. At the council meeting this committee reported and 
 recommended the sale of this department of the plant. The report was 
 as follows : 
 
 "Appropriated in 18D5 $14,589, transferred $2,01)0 ; in 1896 appro- 
 priated *12.000, transferred ^3,000 ; 1897, appropriated $15,123, trans- 
 ferred 84.000 ; IS'.lS, appropriated 816.000; in 1899, $6,700. Interests 
 years, on outstanding bonds, .*1'3,400, making 89'),812. 
 
 Five j'ears street lighting, from statements published, average, 813,000 
 — total, 865,000 ; and we have 830,812, cost of commercial plant. 
 
 Commercial machinery on hand, per inventory, 812,450. showing an 
 approximate loss of $18,362. Of this there is yet 87,000 on hand to run 
 until April Ist, 1900. If this $7,000 will see them through, they have 
 al)out ^IS.OOO in live years that is unaccounted for, and nothing for depre- 
 ciation since the i)lant was V)uilt." 
 
 The maj'or opp(Jsed the action of the committee and made some very 
 strong charges, which called for an answer from the committee as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 " I supposed it was facts and figures that it was the duty of the com- 
 mittee to furnish, as nearly as they could from sources available, of the 
 success or failure of the commercial portion of our city's electric light 
 plant. This was done conscieutiouslj^ and we reported accordingly." 
 
 The mayor saj'S : " I don't know where they obtained their ligures." 
 The chairman of committee answers as follows : " For his information 
 as well as for all interested, they were taken from the official reports of 
 the common council and from the annual reports of the treasurer. ♦ * 
 I ask any and all to examine the official records, and see who, if any one, 
 is falsifying figures. Expense account, in my judgment, should l)e 
 charged with much that is now charged to the plant. I am aware that 
 the larger the expense account is the more will be the monthlj' average 
 of our arc lights, but in justice to tax payers I sa3' nothing should be 
 charged to either plant as permanent that the manager cannot at any 
 time show you and produce a voucher Viill for same, if required. If any 
 part or portion is worn out, destroyed or lost, all such should be made 
 good from expense account. In looking over the invoice of the com- 
 mercial plant, it seems to me that I see several amounts, amounting to a 
 goodly sum that should be in expense account. 
 
 S. W. THOMPSON, Chairman. 
 
 A tax paj'er of Jamestown, in the local paper, says : 
 " The mayor, in all the time he spent looking up municipal lighting, 
 did not obtain any information as to prices in the citv of Jamestown. 
 He did not tell that he knew of one concern that paid the city two cents 
 per 1,000 Watts, and another ten cents j)er 1,000 Watts. Now, it is a fact 
 that incandescent lights are furnished for ten cents each. It is also a 
 fact that ten incandescent lights cost as much to run as one supposed 
 1.200 arc. Ten incandescent lights at ten cents would be 81. Now, who 
 
 95
 
 would ever think of furnishing? an arc ligjht for $1 ? He did not tell the 
 Journal that there were 63 lights furnished free of charge. He gives 
 the prices in other cities. Why did he not give Jamestown's prices? 
 Oh, nol the tax paj'ers would be surprised. 
 
 "The special committee is composed of good men, and, no doubt, 
 they have looked into all matters pertaining to commercial lighting, and 
 I think I can safely say that it is the wish of all Jamestowners who pay 
 .taxes that the council sustain this special committee. Municipal owner- 
 ship in Jamestown is a failure, and there doesn't seem to be any one who 
 knows who to put the blame on." 
 
 KALAMAZOO, Mich., plant, .$43,000; coal, $2.45 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, $13,000 ; interest at live per cent, $2,150 ; depreciation, 
 $2,150; taxes and insurance, $430; making $17,730, cost of streetlights 
 burned 8,000 hours, costing .0295 per hour, and furnishing 677 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 KENDALLVILLE, Ind., plant, $8,000 ; coal, f 2.25 per toQ ; oper- 
 ating expenses, $28,000 ; interest at five per cent, $400 ; depreciation, 
 $400 ; taxes and insurance, $50 ; making $3,650, less income, $1,000, and 
 we have $2,650, as cost of street lights, burned 2,000 hours, costing .022 
 per hour, and furnishing 909 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 LOWELL, Mich., plant, $23,000 ; water power : operating expenses, 
 $4,077.70; interest at five per cent, $1,150; depreciation, $1,150; taxes 
 and insurance, $230 ; sinking fund for bonds, $1,150 ; making $7,757.70, 
 less income, $3,613, and we have 84,144.70, as cost of street lights burned 
 1,500 hours, costing .043 per hour, and furnishing 431 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 LISBON, Iowa., plant, $5,000; coal, $2.50 per ton; operating 
 
 expenses, $1,500 ; interest at four per cent, $200 ; depreciation, $250 ; 
 taxes and insiirance, $25 ; sinking fund for bonds, $250 ; making $2,225, 
 less income, $1,000, and we have $625, as cost of street lights burned 
 1,500 hours, costing X)32 per hour, and furnishing 625 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 LEON, Iowa, plant, $13,000; coal, $1.90 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $3,100; interest at six per cent, $780 ; depreciation, $650; 
 taxes and insurance, $180 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $500 ; making 
 $5,160, less income, $3,300, and we have $1,860, cost of 54 16-candle power 
 incandescent lights for streets burned until 10.30 o'clock only, on moon- 
 light schedule, being $34.44 per lamp per year. 
 
 LOGANSPORT, Ind., plant, $130,665.45; natural gas; operating 
 expenses, $23,073.35 ; interest at five per cent, $6,583.27 ; depreciation, 
 $6,583.27 ; taxes and insurance, $1,306.65; making $37,446.54, less income, 
 $19,946.77, and we have $17,499.77, cost of street lights burned 4,000 
 hours, costing .024 per hour, and furnishing 833 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 96
 
 The plaut ■was installed in 1895, and in 1890, they had to put in new 
 boilers and engines, at au expense of !5r2.4i)1.24. 
 
 The net earnings in 189U were 8~,00U less than the previous year. 
 
 In an open discussion Councilman Boyer charged that " There was 
 mismanagement in operating the plaut." 
 
 Councilman Thos. Austin asserted that the plant was not making 
 expenses, and that, by reasons of expenditures from the general fund, 
 private citizens who did not have the service were pajing taxes to give 
 their neighbors luxuries, which consumers should pay themselves, and 
 that it was evident that the city was losing money. 
 
 We have here an illustration of how a municipal plant operates when 
 controlled by politics. 
 
 The present administration is democratic, and when the plant was 
 initiated it was republican, and the democrats saj' they cannot raise rates, 
 as it would re-act on the part}-, showing the business management of 
 municipalities. 
 
 A Committee from Washington, Ind., who %nsited Logansport, were 
 told that the city was lighted free of cost ; that a dwelling house with 14 
 lights only paid 08 cents per month for the whole number. 
 
 LEWISTON, Me., plant, :?2;5,000; water power ; operating expenses, 
 $8,000 ; interest at four per cent, $1,000 ; depreciation, $1,250 ; taxes and 
 insurance, $250; water rent. $700 ; making $11,200, cost of street lights 
 burned 4,000 hours, costing .0178 per hour, furnishing G74 candle power 
 per hour for one cent. 
 
 LANSING, Mich., plant, $10fi,000 ; coal, $3.25 per ton ; operating 
 expenses. $18,000 ; interest at live per cent, $5,300; depreciation, $5,800 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $1,000 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $3,000 ; making 
 $32,000, lees income. $20,000, and we have $12,000, cost of street lights 
 burned 4,000 hours, costing .0253 per hour, and furnishing 790 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The mayor says : 
 
 " That the plant has cost $106,000, and is far from being worth any 
 such amount, and in thus doing business the city is really engaged in 
 wholesale larceny. 
 
 " If the (luestion was now, for the first time, presented to the city 
 whether they should embark in the business of furnishing commercial 
 lights, I should most assuredly say that it should nt)t. We cannot sell it 
 for anything like its cost. We ought to go out of the business, and 
 charge the loss up to experiment fund." 
 
 Their lights were so unsatisfactory that they paid an expert $400 to 
 tell them how to remedy the evil, and he told them they must spend 
 ^(5,000 in order to stop the trouble. 
 
 LYONS, Iowa. The city auditor, with two other officials, made an 
 investigation of the oi)eratiug expenses of the municipal plant for ten 
 years, and they found that, prior to January 1. 1807, the average expeuses 
 of the plaut had been $113 i)er lamp per year, with a 1,200 candle ))ower 
 
 97 
 
 iV
 
 lamp operating on a moonlight schedule to midnight. These are the 
 facts as found bj' the city officials, showing that the cost was .0773 
 per hour, and only furnishing 155 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MIAMISBURG, Ohio, plant, $11,000; coal, .fl.72perton ; operating 
 expenses, $3,377.92 ; interest at five per cent, $550 ; depreciation, $550 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $110 ; making $4,587.92, cost of street lights burned 
 2,000 hours, costing .0395 per hour, and furnishing 500 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 MARSEILLES, 111., plant, $30,000; water power: operating 
 expenses, $2,500; interest at five per cent, $1,800 : depreciation. $1,800 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $300 ; making $6,100, less income, $3,500, and we 
 have $2,600, as cost of street lights burned 3,500 hours, costing .0148 per 
 hour, and furnishing 1,351 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MARTINSVILLE, Ind. Street lighting is done by the city. No 
 account is kept of the cost of operation. 
 
 MONTPELIER, Ohio, plant, $15,000; coal, $2.50 per ton; oper- 
 ating expenses, $3,417.79; interest at six per cent, $900 ; depreciation, 
 $750 ; taxes and insurance, $100 ; sinking fund for bonds, $750; making 
 $5,917.79, less income, $3,542.21, and we have $2,375.58, as cost of street 
 lights burned 1,500 hours, costing .0405 per hour, and furnishing 430 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MATTOON, 111., plant, $20,000 ; coal, 75 cents per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $4,375.36 ; interest at five per cent. $1,000 ; depreciation, 
 $1,000; taxes and insurance, $100; making $6,475.36, cost of street 
 lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0297 per hour, and furnishing 673 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MADISON, N. J., has a municipal plant, and at a meeting of the 
 city council. Councilman Anderson stated that "It is a condition and 
 not a theory that effects the borough of Madison. We are like a man 
 in business who owes a bonded indebtedness of $115,000. The annual 
 interest upon this bonded debt is $5,750, annual expenses of conducting 
 the business, $13,184.25, making a total of $18,934.25. Deduct from this 
 the revenue, $14,400, andit shows an annual loss of $4,534.25. Of course the 
 bonded indebtedness will not be paid, and the plant each year is becom- 
 ing less valuable. Finally it will be comparatively worthless, the bonds 
 unpaid a floating debt, and no funds on hand, thus leaving the borough 
 in a worse financial condition each year. It will be seen also that a 
 large number enjoy water and lights which others pay for.'''' This 
 councilman's statement, as given above, shows a loss each year of $4,534.25, 
 not including anything for depreciation or taxes, and this showing in- 
 cludes the water works, which, we are told, when run in connection with 
 electric lights, reduce the cost very largely. Such facts disclosed by a 
 
 98
 
 member of the city council, in n discussion at one of their meetiu^^s prove 
 very clearly that the reports sent out by advocates of municipal owner, 
 ship and claiming that the business at Madison was a success are not in 
 accoraauce with the facts or the true condition. 
 
 MCSHAWAKA, Ind., plant. $30,000; coal, $1.98 per ton: oper- 
 ating expenses, *;8,000 : interest at (J per cent, ."11,800; depreciation, 
 !i!l,")00 ; taxes and insurance, ."ftSOO ; sinking fund for bonds, !t;l,l;')0 ; 
 making $13,750, lesrf income, $7,000, and we have $5,750, as cost of street 
 lights burned 2,200 hours, costing .05 per hour, and furnishing 400 can- 
 dle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MTJNCIE, Ind., plant, $;]0,000; coal, $2. 65 per ton; operating expenses, 
 $5,781 ; interest at 4 percent, $1,200; depreciation, $1,500; taxes and 
 insurance, $300; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,000 ; making $0,781, cost 
 of street lights burned 3,200 hours, costing .0209 per hour, and furnish- 
 ing 956 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MEADVILLE, Pa., plant, $20,000; coal, $2.16perton; operating ex- 
 penses, $5,500; interest at 5 per cent, $1,000; depreciation, $1,000; 
 taxes and insurance, $200 ; making $7,700, cost of street lights burned 
 3,500 hours, costing .02 per hour, and furnishing 1,000 caudle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 MARSHALLTOWN, Iowa, has been cited in numerous places as 
 showing a remarkal)le record and success of its municipal plant. At 
 the convention in Columbus the mayor of Marshalltowu made a report 
 of that plant. It was stated in his report that the water-works bonds 
 had been refunded at 4 per cent interest ; that three men were emploj'ed 
 in the water-works plant ; that they paid each of these men $5 additional 
 salarj' when electric lights were started ; the coal required to run the 
 lights was given as 108 tons per year. That account, as reported, stood 
 as follows : 
 
 " Interest on $10,000 at 5 per cent, .$800 ; renewal on $16,000 at 5 per 
 cent, $800; salary of men at lighting station, $180 ; lineman, $720 ; coal, 
 $135 ; running expenses, $200 ; making a total of $2,835 for the j'ear. 
 Thus the city has the use of 98 arc lamps of 1,200 candle power at a cost 
 of $2,835 per year, or $29.50 per light per year." 
 
 In examining the city clerk's report for 1899, I find that they are 
 paying 4h, 5 and 8 per cent interest upon their bonded debt, making an 
 average of 5 6-10 per cent. The plant cost $12,000. and the cost of mak- 
 ing the addition to the water-works building was $2,000, and the expense 
 of changing the dynamos was $4,500, making a total of .'(;1S,,500. The salary 
 of the men at the lighting station was given at $180'per year. They were 
 employing three men at the station, and paid these $ ISO additional wages, 
 but now they have to employ four men, one of these being paid $00 per 
 month, making an expense of $720 to add to the electric light paj' roll, 
 and a total of $1,620 per year. Cost of coal was given at 108 tons, cost- 
 
 99
 
 ing $135 per year, while the report shows that they used last year 452j 
 tons, costing $565. All running expenses were given as $200. They 
 claim to burn 98 lamps ; this would require at least one and one-half car- 
 bons per lamp per night, and if only burned 300 nights in the year, 
 would make a total of 44,100 carbons, at $10 per thousand would be $441. 
 
 Therefore, we have the following: Pay roll, $1,620; coal, $565; 
 carbons, $441 ; interest on 118,500 at 5 6-10 per cent, $1,036 ; deprecia- 
 tion at rate made by mayor, $925 ; taxes, $35 ; making a total of $4,622, 
 being $48.14 per year, and costing .0228 cents per hour, and furnishing 
 520 candle power for one cent. 
 
 In the above calculation nothing is included for repairs upon engine, 
 dynamo, belts, or for oil, brushes, office expenses, lamps, or water rent. 
 A private company at Jackson, Mich., deliver the lights at a cost of 
 .0178 cents per hour, furnishing 1123 candle power for one cent. There 
 is nothing very remarkable in the record at Marshalltown except the 
 fact that they burn the lights a few hours each night a part of every 
 month. 
 
 The private company at Jackson is furnishing 597 more candle 
 power for one cent than is furnished by the municipal plant at Marshall- 
 town. The plan of charging nearly all the expenses to the water works 
 does not relieve the tax payers. That this has been done in Marshall- 
 town is evident. An examination of the council proceedings for Aug. 
 14, 1899, shows that the only expense for the month of July charged to 
 the electric light was one lineman's wages of $00, and a small item for 
 supplies, while in the water-works account we find $466 charged as pay 
 roll, and $325 charged for wages of engineers and superintendent, be- 
 sides all the oil, waste, and repairs. The report says: "Installed 14 
 new arc lights," but there is nothing to show that they cost a cent. Who 
 paid for them, and to what account were they charged? They also have 
 on hand two arc dynamos, which cost in 1887, over $6,000, and now can- 
 not be sold for more than ^600. thus making a loss of $5,400 to the tax- 
 payers. This has not been considered in the above calculations of cost. 
 Statement was made that "the water works pays all running expenses 
 and interest on the debt, for all extensions and repairs, and left the city 
 several thousand dollars profit." Why, if this is the case, was a three- 
 mill tax on the dollar for water works voted Aug. 14, 1899 'i 
 
 MACON, Mo. , plant cost $50,000 ; 40 arc, 2,000 candle power. The 
 electric lights and water works run as one plant, and no way of separating 
 accounts. The operating expenses, including interest, depreciation and 
 taxes, amounted to §11,300, charging only one-half to the electric lights, 
 gives $5,900 for the year, less income from incandescent lights, $2,500, 
 leaves a net expenditure of $3,400 for 40 street lights, being $85 per lamp 
 per year, costing .0226 per hour, and furnishing 884 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 MARIETTA, Ohio, plant, $21,000; naturalgas; operating expenses, 
 $6,592,75; interest at four and one-half per cent, $945; depreciation, 
 
 100
 
 $l,OoO; taxes and insurance, SSIO ; sinking fund to puj' bonds, 8750; 
 umkiii',' *!),.'J47.7"), cost of street li<?bts Imrned 4,000 hours, costiujt? .0^13 
 per hour, and t'uruishiuj? 1)88 caudle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 luterviewinf? a prominent citizen, he said : 
 
 Marietta owned the electric li^rht |)laut and a theater ; that six of the 
 council refused to act any louprer for love or money ; that i)olitics was in 
 c'luuire of the lousiness : but that they lived in hopes, uh their lunatic 
 asylum was only 40 miles away. 
 
 MARTINS FERRY, Ohio. i>limt, IsHO.OOO ; coal, Gl cents per ton ; 
 operatiufx expenses, t7,S4!).4() ; interest at five jier cent, 81.500 ; dei)re- 
 ciatiou, ^1,500; taxes and insurance, 8'!00; sinking fund ttj pay bonds, 
 ^1,000 ; making 813, r)4'.), less income, ^3,!)20, and we have 88,72!), cost of 
 street lights burned 3.000 hours, costing .0285 per hour, and furnishing 
 701 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MARSHALL, Mich., plant, 850,000; water power; operating 
 expenses, 83,S00 ; interest at five per cent. 82,500; depreciation, 82,500 ; 
 taxes and insurance, 8500 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, 82,000 ; making 
 811,300, less income, 84,500, and we have 8<>.800, cost of street lights 
 burned 2,000 hours, costing .0404 per hour, and furnishing 4i)5 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MOUNT PLEASANT, Iowa, plant, 822,000; coal, 81.95 per ton ; 
 operating exi)euses, 83,000: interest at five per cent, 81,100; deprecia- 
 tion, $1,100; taxes and insurance, 8220; making 85.420, less income, 
 83,000, and we have 82,420. cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, 
 costing .0101 per hour, and furnishing 49() candle power per hour for one 
 cent. 
 
 MAZOMANIE, Wis., plant, 810,000; coal, 83..55 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, 82,000; interest at live per cent, 8500; depreciation, 8500; 
 taxes and insurance, 8100; sinking fund to pay bonds, 8500: making 
 82.000, less income, 82,000, and we have •'^'OOO, cost of incandescent street 
 light l)urned until eleven o'clock each night, costing $10.00 per him|) per 
 year. 
 
 MARBLEHEAD, Mass., plant, $85,518; have 1,G00 candle power 
 lamps, and cost, as shown by the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners 
 of the state, 808.75 per year, burned 3,000 hours, costing .0220 per hour, 
 and furnishing 08!) candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 They also use 30 candle power incaudescents, costing 817.73 per 
 3'ear, and IG caudle power, 8!^.42, and 25 candle power at a cost of .814.70 
 per year. 
 
 MIDDLEBORO, Mass., plant, 8100,494 ; have 1,200 candle 
 power lamps, and cost, as shown by the statement of the Gas and Electric 
 Light Commissioners, for lights burned until midnight, 8102.47, and 
 those Vmrned all night, 818G.31. The midnight lamps burned 1,272 hours, 
 
 101
 
 costing .08 per hour, and furnishing 150 candle power per hour for one 
 cent. The all night lamps burned 2,313 hours, costing .08 per hour, and 
 furnishing 150 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The New Bedford Standard says : 
 
 " Middleboro's experiment in the municipal ownership of a 
 lighting plant shows that something more than the mere ownership of 
 engines and dynamos and poles and wires is essential to the success of 
 such a venture. Middleboro is a thriving place. It has an intelli- 
 gent population. Many of its inhabitants are more than ordinarily 
 successful business men. Yet the lighting experiment under the direc- 
 tion of the town is confessedly a fiat failure. It is horrible costly, so 
 costly, in fact, that it is impossible to figure out one of those rosy state- 
 ments with which the advocates of municipal lighting plants are wont to 
 regale the people. We have heard it intimated that there has been bad 
 management. There certainly has not been harmonious management. 
 
 MADISONVILLE, Ohio, plant, $30,000; coal, $1.85 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, $4,631 ; interest at five per cent, $1,500; depreciation, 
 •$1,500 ; taxes and insurance, $150 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,500 ; 
 making $9,431, less income, $5,119, and we have $4,313, cost of street 
 lights burned 1,500 hours, costing ,0378 per hour, and furnishing 317 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MARION, Ind., plant, $24,000; natural gas ; operating expenses, 
 $5,500; interest at four and one-half per cent, $1,080; depreciation, 
 $1,200; taxes and insurance, $240; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,200; 
 making $9,220, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0281 
 per hour, and furnishing 711 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MORGAN PARK, 111., plant, $5,500 ; coal, $1.85 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $1,500 ; interest at six per cent, 1330 ; depreciation, ■■j-275 ; 
 making $2,105, cost of street lights burned 1,400 hours, costing .03 per 
 hour, and furnishing 666 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The authorities state that all the operating expenses, except the 
 salaries, are charged to the water works, 
 
 MARaXJETTE, Mich., plant, $100,000; water power ; operating 
 expenses, $6,855.35; interest at five per cent, $5,000; depreciation, 
 $5,000; taxes, $500; sinking fund to pay maturing bonds, $4,750; 
 making $22,105.35, less income, $9,473.61, and we have $12,631.74, as cost 
 of street lights burned 4,000 hours, costing .0263 per hour, and furnish- 
 ing 760 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 MORRISVILLE, Vt., plant, $25,000 ; water power ; operating 
 expenses, $2,800 ; interest at four per cent, $1,000 ; depreciation, $1,250 ; 
 taxes and insurance, ■'150 ; sinking fund for bonds, $1,000 ; making 
 $6,100, less income, $3,550, and we have $2,550, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .0809 per hour, and furnishing 247 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 102
 
 NORTH EAST, Pa., plant, s9,000 ; ooal, 81.05 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $2,200 ; interest at five per cent. .*4o0 ; depreciation, •*450 ; 
 taxes and insurance, *90 ; making *3,190. less income, $1,500, and we 
 have !?l,6fl0, as cost of street lights bnrued 1.500 hours, costing .04 per 
 hour, and furnishing 500 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 NEGAUNEE, Mich., furnishes a fair illustration of municipal 
 ownership. Thej' believed the statements of parties who were trying to 
 sell them a plant, and. after it was installed and operated a couple of 
 years, they found it was a loosing aftair, and finally employed two 
 experts from Chicago to make a thorough investigation and report cost 
 of lights furnished by the municipal plant. 
 
 The following report of these experts to the mayor and council shows 
 fully the working of such business : 
 7'o the honorable mayor and common council of the city of Negaunee : 
 
 GextIiEMEN : 
 
 " We beg to submit herewith our report, based upon an examination 
 of the books of the electric light plant and water plant, the examination 
 being made, as per your instructions, to determine what the actual cost 
 per year for the lighting plant has been to the city, and from this to 
 determine how much it is costing the city for arc lamps for street 
 lighting. 
 
 '• We find that the accounts of the two plants are really kept in three 
 sets of bookfi. One set for water, which books are intended to show the 
 expenditures and receipts of what might be called books covering the 
 operation of the plant. A similar set are kept for the electric light, the 
 third set being the city department books. 
 
 • "While the books checked and balanced with each other on the 
 various accounts examined by the writers, the methods employed in 
 keeping these accounts is not such as shows the true cost to the city 
 of either the water plant or the electric light plant. Prior to the 
 installation of the electric light plant, there being but one set of 
 operating accounts, all charges, receipts, disbursements, etc., were 
 necessarily charged to the water account, so that a true statement could 
 be very easily arrived at. 
 
 '• Under the present arrangement, both the electric light station and 
 pumping station being operated under the same roof, iising fuel jointly, 
 likewise, oil. waste, etc.. and the labor account being divided between the 
 two plants, it will reciuire a very careful set of records being kept of the 
 station, and necessitate the accounts being more segregated, and much, 
 more carefully kept at the clerk's office, in order to ever be able to 
 determine how much each station is costing the city of Negaunee per 
 year to operate. The actual output of the pumping station can only be 
 guessed at in gallons, and as to the output of the electric light station 
 the same can be said. It must be evident to you that, unless the relative 
 outputs are known, and the efficiencies of the apparatus, it is absolutely 
 impossible to tell what proportion of the fuel used should be charged to 
 the pumping station and what to the lighting station. 
 
 103
 
 "A careful examination, however, of the accounts of the pumping 
 station, prior to the electric light plant being put in and operated in 
 conjunction with same, should show, within a reasonable limit, whether 
 too much is now being charged to the pumping station or not enough, 
 and from the records it would seem to show that entirely too much was 
 being charged against the pumping station, as, for instance, the running 
 expense account, as shown in the pumping station ledger for the fiscal 
 year 1897 to 1898, and then from 1898 to 1899, is as fol 
 
 Operating expenses, '97 to '98 $4,497 44 
 
 Income of earnings, 7,392 19 
 
 Net earnings, 
 
 Operating expenses, '98 to '99, 
 Income of earnings, 
 
 $2,894 75 
 
 $5,884 88 
 6,970 29 
 
 Net earnings, SI, 085 41 
 
 From this you will see that the operating expenses for the fiscal 
 year 1898 to 1899 increased .$1,387.44, while the revenue for the same 
 period decreased .$421.90. With the exception of an increase of .flO a 
 month for each of the two engineers, there is no apparent reason why 
 the cost of operation for the year 1898 to 1899 should have been within 
 some ,f 1,.500 of what it was in 1897 to 1898, as over $2,0U0 was spent on 
 water mains in 1897 to 1898, whereas the accounts show that only $048.60 
 was spent in betterments and improvements on the water plant from 
 1898 to 1899. 
 
 As the fiscal year for the city begins each April Ist, and as the light- 
 ing plant started Sept. 3, 1897, we will only be able to take one com- 
 plete year for operating expenses, receipts, etc., for the lighting plant, to 
 wit : April, 1898 to April, 1899. This year is in reality from March 1st to 
 March Ist, rather than from April, as the accounts are supposed to be 
 closed in March, the recorder making a statement the 1st of April. 
 
 The following is a copy of the recorder's report for the electric light 
 station for the fiscal year 1898 to 1899 : 
 
 RECEIPTS. 
 
 Electric light, 
 
 Materials and lamps, ....... 
 
 Gross receipts, 
 
 EXPENDITURES. 
 
 Oil 
 
 Fuel, 
 
 Service, 
 
 Lamps, .......... 
 
 Euuniug expenses 
 
 Salar^^, .......... 
 
 Gross expenses 
 
 or a balance in favor of electric light plant of . 
 
 $4,346 25 
 
 304 90 
 
 $4,651 
 
 15 
 
 $ 66 
 
 96 
 
 1,444 
 
 94 
 
 147 
 
 28 
 
 147 
 
 19 
 
 62 65 
 
 2,0.50 00 
 
 $3,919 02 
 
 732 
 
 13 
 
 104
 
 The above balance of $732,13 means that the cit3', after paying io per 
 month per arc li^ht and $25.25 per month for incandescent light- 
 ing, which lights are in the city hall, engine and hose houses 
 and band stand, still has ^732.13, to be credited to cost of op- 
 eration. This statement is apparently true as far as monej'S i)aid out 
 through orders from the recorder's office and moneys received at the re- 
 corder's office, but is by no means true statement as to the cost per 
 year of the plaut to the city. 
 
 To get the true cost of operating any business, and particularl.v an 
 electric light station, factory or an}' place where there is machinerj' and 
 material which depreciates more or less rapidly', iuadditiou to the actual 
 operating expenses, that is such expenses as represent fuel, oil, labor, 
 etc. , a certain depreciation must be charged as well as interest on invest- 
 ment, to show a true statement as to the actual cost of the station, fac- 
 tory or what not per year. 
 
 The cost of the plant to the cit^', as shown by the electric light 
 books, March 15, 181*8, is 811,G92.23, this including the original contract 
 price of $9,1)74, and the addition to building at the power station of $37(3, 
 or a total of $10,350, the $1,342.83 including labor and material which 
 had been put into the plant from the date of starting to the above date. 
 
 This is not a true statement as to the cost of the plaut, for the writer 
 finds in the city department books that $1,U00 was transferred in Sep- 
 tember, 1897, and >;2,000 was transferred from city water fund to electric 
 light fund, and further that paj'ments made to F. B. Eae, engineer 
 for the electric light plaut, had been charged to city tax fund and not to 
 the electric light plaut, this amount being $002.75, or at least this is all 
 the charge that can be found against his account, and as the onlj' way of 
 finding same is to go through the stubs of check books or through the 
 jourual entries of the city department. This $3,002.75, which has been 
 added to the cost of the electric light plant, makes a total of $15,355.58 
 for the true cost of the plaut to April, 1899. 
 
 During the fiscal year 1898 to 1899, $830.44 is charged to account of 
 electric light plant construction, which should represent an additional 
 value to the plant, but examination of account shows that at least 50 per 
 cent of this amount should be charged to running expenses. Dividing 
 this account and putting half of it in betterments and improvements 
 brings the total cost of the plant to April, 1899. to $15,773.80. 
 
 The total expense of the plaut for the j'ear ending April, 1899, is 
 $4,757.90, and from this we will deduct $418.22. to get the operating ex- 
 penses, making 84,339.74, as the cost of operating for the j-ear ending 
 1899. 
 
 The depreciation in your plant we will take at five percent, although 
 you will find that the depreciation in the cost of this plant will be very 
 much greater than five and much nearer ten per cent, but we will take 
 five, as that was the estimate made by your consulting engineer, who in- 
 stalled the plant. We will also allow a five per cent interest on invest- 
 ment, or a total of ten per cent on $15,773.80, or $1,577.38, which is to 
 be added to your operating expenses of $4,339.74, giving a total cost to 
 
 105
 
 the city for the operation of the electric light plant of $5,917.12 for the 
 last fiscal year. 
 
 Your books show a total earning of |4, 651. 1.5, which leaves a deficit 
 of .fl, 265.97, instead of a profit of $732.13, or a difference of *1, 998.10 
 between the April statement, as shown by your books, and the correct 
 statement. 
 
 " As the receipts did not equal the cost of operation by $1,265.97, and, 
 as the incandescent lighting for the city is but a small item, to determine 
 the real cost of an arc lamp per year, we should divide this amount by 
 the average number of lamps which have been in service, viz., 35, and 
 add same to the amount charged to the city, viz., t60 per year per light, 
 which brings the cost to 193.33, as the cost to the city per arc lamp for 
 street lighting on a moonlight schedule. 
 
 "In the first part of this report, your' attention was called to the 
 increase in cost of operating the plant and the decreased revenue received 
 from the pumping station since the electric light plant had been in 
 operation, viz., in the year 1898 to 1899 the cost of operation increased 
 $1,387.44, and the revenue decreased $421.90. 
 
 "As the division of the operating expenses l)etween these two has 
 been, necessarily, guessed at. it is but logical to assume that this increase in 
 the water plant is due, to a large extent, to charges being made to the 
 water plant, in the way of fuel, material, etc., which should have been 
 made to the electric light. A most conservative estimate would be to 
 charge.$500 of this $1,387.44 back to the electric light, for, as previously 
 shown, the city added $2,213.11 to the value of the pumping station from 
 1897 to 1898, and only $648.60 from 1898 to 1899, yet the total cost of 
 operating from 1898 to 1899 was over $1,300 more than the preceding 
 year, and the only visible increase legitimately should have been $240, 
 in the way of increase of salary of the two engineers. Taking this $500 
 as an increase in the cost of operation would bring the cost per arc lamp 
 to the city for the last year $106.49. 
 
 " The cost of coal has been $2.78 per ton until August 1st, and the 
 writer is advised that since that date the city has had to pay .$3.40 per 
 ton, or an increase of some 22 per cent. Taking the coal bills for last 
 year, as shown by the electric light books, as a basis, this additional 22 
 per cent for the cost of coal still further increases the cost of the arc 
 lights $8 per year, or, in other words, if, during the past year, you had 
 to pay 13.40 per ton for coal, which is what you will now have to pay, 
 your arc lights would cost $114.49 each per year to operate. 
 
 " We figure that the total expense to the city for the electric plant 
 to April, 1899, including cost of plant, interest on investment, deprecia- 
 tion, and operating expenses is $23,198.96, and the total receipts 
 $6,524.43." 
 
 This makes the lights burned 2,200 hours, costing .052 per hour, and 
 furnishing 384 caudle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The following editorial from Iron Ore, published at Ishpenning, 
 Mich. , covers the case fully : 
 
 106
 
 "The Negftunee plaut has been losing money steadily since its 
 installation. 
 
 " Au expert was secured to ti^jure this out for the administration of 
 local affairs in that towu, and he discovered that it was equal to some of 
 the new copper stocks as a returner of dividends for the niouey invested. 
 
 " We know that municipalities which have adopted self lightinj^are 
 prone to give their pets the best of it, and to help them out with funds 
 from other accounts, and to charge up costs that should go to lighting to 
 some other accounts, this lieiug done in order to show the wisdom of 
 their directing things. It wouldn't be good for them politically to 
 acknowledge such an error. 
 
 " The curse of muuicijial ownership of things is political operation. 
 It would not be a question of economy, but of who could be at the head 
 and get the fat that could be tried out of the carcass. 
 
 " The business of the tax payer would be prostituted by the gentle- 
 men of leisure who want to be kept in soft positions at the expense of 
 those who pay taxes. 
 
 " And, as is common, it would not be the tax payers who would be 
 sitting up nights trj'iug to figure out how the3' could hold these fat 
 takes. 
 
 " It is a sure thing that the tax payers of this citj- would see to the 
 eti'ectual killing of anj- proposition for the city to go into the lighting 
 business, for the sake of providing soft places for a few gentlemen who 
 vere born tired. 
 
 •' The movement has nothing in it but politics. It is a movement to 
 help the gentlemen who desire to remain in office, and hope to create 
 a little excitement favorable to their desires." 
 
 NORTHFIELD, Vt.. plant, $40,042.29; water power; operating 
 expenses. i^T.OUU ; interest at five per cent, 82,000 ; depreciation, 82,000 ; 
 taxes and insurance, >'400 ; making ^11,400, less income, ^5,0U0. and we 
 have ■?G,400, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, and costing !i=2r).00 
 per lamp per j'ear for incandescent lamps. 
 
 After they installed the plaut the water wheels failed and had to be 
 replaced with new ones, at au expense of .'?4,400. The dam also gave 
 out, and a new one had to be built, costing ^'4,207. r)2. These repairs 
 were charged to construction, but should have gone to expense. 
 
 Before the plant was installed the total debt of the village was 
 4:2,082, now it is i?40,248. 
 
 NEWBERRY, S. C, plant, .•?0.000 ; coal, 83.3") per ton; operating 
 expenses, .•*3,o00 ; interest at six per cent, ^040; depreciation, ^450; taxes 
 and insurance, $90; sinking fund for bonds, >'500; making ."?'), OSO, less 
 income, 81,650 ; and we have 83,430, as cost of street lights burned 2,000 
 hours, costing .035 per hour, and furnishing 571 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 lo:
 
 NEEDHAM, Mass., plant, |15,697; use 25 candle po^ver incandes- 
 cent for streets, and, as stated by the Massachusetts Commissioners, 
 cost f 11.94 per year, burned 1,249 hours. 
 
 NORTH ATTLEBORO, Mass., plant. |58,421 ; have 82 can- 
 dle power incandescent for streets, costing, as shown by the Gas and 
 Electric Light Commissioners, --IIO.OG per year, burned 1,249 hours. 
 
 ORTONVILLE, Minn., plant, if^lO.OOO ; coal, $(j per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $2,145.48 ; interest at five per cent, $500 ; depreciation, $500 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $100 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $500 ; making 
 $3,745.48, less income, $1,668.96. and we have $2,076.42, cost of street 
 lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0692 per hour, and furnishing 289 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 OVID, Mich, plant, $10,000; coal, $2.66 per ton; operating ex- 
 penses, $3,700; interest at four per cent, $400 ; depreciation, $500 ; taxes 
 and insurance, $100; sinking fund to pay bonds. $500 ; making $5,200, 
 less income, $2, 720, and we have $2,480, cost of street lights burned 1,500 
 hours, costing ,0688 per hour, and furnishing 290 candle per hour for 
 one cent. 
 
 OSAGE CITY, Kan., plant, $10,000 ; coal, $1.90 per ton ; operat- 
 ing expenses, $2,000 ; interest at six per cent, $600; depreciation, $500; 
 taxes and insurance, $100; sinking fund to pa^- bonds, $500; making 
 $3,700, less income, $1,300, and we have $2,400, cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .0355 per hour, and furnishing 563 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 OXFORD, Ohio, plant, $35,000 ; coal, $3.60 per ton ; operating ex- 
 penses, $5,073 ; interest at four per cent, $1,400 ; depreciation, $1,750 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $350 ; making $8,573, less income, $5,432, and we 
 have $3,141, as cost of street lights' burned 1,500 hours, costing .051 per 
 hour, and furnishing 392 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 PAINESVILLE, Ohio, plant, $12,500 ; coal, $2.15 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $4,300 ; interest at four per cent, $500 ; depreciation, $625 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $100 ; sinking fund for bonds, $625 ; making 
 $6,150, cost of street lights burned 2.000 hours, costing .0353 per hour, 
 and furnishing 566 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 PORTLAND, Mich., plant, $20,000 ; water power ; operating 
 expenses, $2,000 ; interest at five per cent, $1,000 ; depreciation, $1,000 ; 
 taxes and insurance, |200 ; sinking fund for bonds, $975 ; making 
 $5,175, less income, $3,600, and we have $1,575, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .03 per hour, and furnishing 400 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 108
 
 PADUCAH, Ky., plant. 840.000; coal, $1 per ton: operatingr 
 expenses. 8T.000 ; interest at live per cent, .*'2.000; depreciation, *2,U0U; 
 taxes and insurance. .'s400 ; making ■511.400. cost of street lights bnrued 
 3,0'i0 hours, costing .O'SUt per hour, and furnishing 032 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 An interview of prominent citizens disclosed the fact that the plant 
 was merely a political factor, and the city authorities refused to give any 
 information, even to tax pavers, as to the cost of running the plant. 
 
 Horses and feed purchased for the use of the plant are charged to 
 the fire department, and other things in the same way. 
 
 One prominent tax payer stated that the physical condition of the 
 plant had deteriorated, and very little attention has been shown it. The 
 service has been bad, and complaints have been made by citizens as to 
 the (luality of light given. 
 
 PARIS, 111., plant, -^lo.OOO ; coal, $2.25 per ton ; operating expenses, 
 !|3.o00 ; interest at six per cent, $900 ; depreciation. sJToO ; taxes and 
 insurance, $1.00 ; making 85.200. as cost of streetlights burned 3,000 hours, 
 costing .0173 per hour, and furnishing 093 candle power per hour for one 
 cent. 
 
 PAW PAW. Mich., phiut, $20,000: water power; operating 
 expenses. .$1,300 ; interest at five per cent, .$1,000 ; depreciation, $1,000 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $100 ; sinking fund for bonds, $7.00 ; making 
 $4,150, less income, 81,800, and we have $2,350, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,400 hours, costing .0289 per hour, and furnishing 553 caudle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 PLAIN CITY, Ohio, plant, $12,000 ; coal, $2 per ton : operating 
 expenses. $2,333.33: interest at five per cent, $000 ; depreciation. $()U0 : 
 taxes and insurance, .$120 ; sinking fund for bonds. $000 ; making 
 $4,853.32. less income, and we have $2,153.32, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .0422 per hour, and furnishing 473 caudle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 PAWNEE CITY. Neb., plant, $8,500 ; coal, $3.25 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, $2,500 ; interest at seven per cent. $595 ; depreciation, 
 $425 : taxes and insurance, $85 ; sinking fund to pay bo mis. $200 ; making 
 .$3,805, less income, $2,500, and we have .$1,305, cost of street lights 
 burned 1..500 hours, costing .0543 per hour, and furnishing 308 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 PEABODY, Mass., plant. $79,010 ; have 1,200 candle power lamps, 
 and cost per j'ear, as made by the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners, 
 was $73.75, burned 3,100 hours, costing .0237 per hour, and furnishing 
 500 caudle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 They also use 32 candle power iucandescents for streets, costing 
 .$27.81 per year, and 50 candle power, costing .$43.54 per year. Iucan- 
 descents only burned 3,100 hours. 
 
 109
 
 PETOSKEY, Mich. The following editorial from the local paper 
 in Petoskey, Mich. , explains municipal management : 
 
 " A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ELECTRIC LIGHT INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY 
 
 OF PETOSKEY. 
 
 " When Captain Rose owned the electric light plant it was thought 
 that the cost of street lighting was too expensive, and that the city could 
 do its own street lighting more economically. In consequence, it was 
 conceived and recommended by the council and board of public works 
 that a plant be installed, to cost about $8,000. 
 
 " That amount was voted, whereupon Captain Eose offered to sell his 
 entire plant to the city, and the price was agreed upon at f 1G,000. The 
 council again recommended that the previous action be dropped, and 
 that the $16,000 be raised by bonding, which was also voted by the 
 people. 
 
 "After the transfer was made, the council and board of public 
 works appeared to discover that the plant was too ancient, or inadequate, 
 or both, and for a third time recommended that the city mortgage itself for 
 $12,000, for the purpose of repairing the building and installing new 
 machinery. 
 
 " The officials stated that the improvements would not exceed that 
 amoiint. What is the result ? Not only have these honorable city 
 officials dumped all the profits of the plant into it, but they drew $900 
 from funds other than the electric fund, and over drew the electric fund 
 $600, as shown by the Grand Rapids expert's report, while the city is 
 over $10,000 in debt for loose accounts, besides showing an unaccounted 
 shortage of over $2,000. Out on the Charlevoix road, and on Emmet 
 street, have stood for the past year, and are there to-day, wireless poles, 
 monuments to the inefficiency, negligence, and mismanagement of the 
 council and board of pviblic works. Within a year $12,000 was almost 
 unanimously voted for the purpose of modernizing the electric light 
 plant. Now, what is the result ? The plant is over $10,000 in debt, and 
 over $2,000 has been squandered, which no one is able to account for. 
 
 " For nearly a whole year the people have been inconvenienced by 
 miserable lighting service, and half of the time the town was in total • 
 darkness. 
 
 "George A. Horner, the expert accountant engaged by Mayor 
 Barber, has finished his review of the electric light plant accounts. The 
 results of his work are on file in the office of the city clerk, and should 
 be carefully inspected by every tax payer in the city. 
 
 ' ' From a brief examination of the figures, it appears that, instead of 
 the new machinery costing about $7,000, as our people were first assured, 
 the cost has been over $40,000. 
 
 "The following is a copy of the expert's report, as shown in the 
 council room : 
 
 110
 
 New constructiou, . . . , . . 8'23,145.06 
 
 Old constructiou, ...... 2,H;J2.23 
 
 Keul estate. ....... 7.000.00 
 
 Mtichiuery, ....... 7. 814.74 
 
 Accounts receivable, ...... 341). 30 
 
 Amouuts receivable on roll, ..... 388.1)4 
 
 Supplies, ....... 147.04 
 
 Expense, . . . . . . 1/50. .00 
 
 Total. ....... *41 .827.81 
 
 Bonded debt, ....... $28,000.00 
 
 Floating debts, ....... 10,lo<).4G 
 
 Amount drawn from funds other than electric light, . 917.02 
 
 Electric light fund overdrawn, .... C03.52 
 
 Interest on bonds, ...... 327.00 
 
 Assets in excess of liabilities. ..... 1,820.81 
 
 Total, ....... 841,827.81 
 
 " This shows that our practical assets in the unpaid for light plant 
 amount to onlj- $1,820.81. The above statement does not show, however, 
 where the shortage in the supply account went to. 
 
 " There are shortages amounting to thousands of dollars. In other 
 words, that is all we have to show for all the good money which we have 
 put into the plant." 
 
 aUITMAN, Ga., plaut, $16,000; coal, 81.00 per ton; operating 
 expenses, 82,200; interest at six per cent, 8^)00; depreciation, 8800; 
 taxes and insurance, 81t50; sinking fund to paj- bonds, 8.000 ; making 
 84,670, less income, 82,200, and we have 82,420, cost of street lights 
 burned 2,000 hours, costing .0484 per hour, and furnishing 413 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 QUAKERTOWN, Pa., plant, 822,000; coal, 82.10 per ton; oper- 
 ating expenses, 84,01)3 ; interest at four per cent, 8880 : depreciation. 
 81,100; taxes and insurance, 8220; sinking fund to pay bonds, 8750; 
 making 87.043, less income, and we have 83,243, cost of street lights 
 burned 3,000 hours, costing .025 per hour, and furnishing 470 caudle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ROCK FALLS, 111., plant, 810,000; operating expenses, 84,000; 
 interest at four i)er cent, 8400; depreciation, 8500 ; taxes and insurance. 
 iflOO ; sinking fund to paj- bonds, 8500 ; making .85,500. less income, 
 83,000, and we have 82,500, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, 
 costing .0416 per hour, and furnishing 480 candle power per hour for one 
 cent. 
 
 The mayor says : 
 
 It is shown by the foregoing figures that the plant ran behind. 
 Where does this deficiency belong ? The tax paj'er expects to pay the 
 bonded indebtedness incurred by the light plant. He is willing to pay 
 
 111
 
 all expenses due to running and maintaining the arc service, but he 
 rightly objects when asked to make up a deficiency for which he may not 
 be responsible. 
 
 The street light should be supported by and for the benefit of the 
 general tax payer, who rightly asks that he shall not be taxed for more 
 than the fair maintainauce of this service. 
 
 Money j^aid in b.i/ general taxation has been absorbed by the 
 expense of the incandescent lights. It is certainly not justice to tax 
 those who do not use incandescent lights for the benefit of those who do. 
 
 ROCHELLE, 111., plant, $11,000; coal, $3.15 per ton; operating 
 expenses, $4,000; interestat five per cent, $550 ; depreciation, $550 ; taxes 
 and insurance, $700 ; making |5,200, less income, $3,000, and we have 
 $2,200, as cost of street lights ourned 1,200 hours, costing .0416 per hour, 
 and furnishing 480 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 READING, Mass., plant, 174,400; have 1,200 candle power lamps, 
 and the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners state they cost $89.65 per 
 year, Imrued 2,532 hours, costing .0354 per hour, and furnishing 338 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 RENSSELAER, Ind., plant, $8,000; coal, $1.95 per ton; operat- 
 ing expenses, •'$6,000 ; interest at six per cent, $480; depreciation, $400 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $80 ; sinking fund to pay mortgage, $700 ; making 
 $7,660, less income, $5,000, and we have ■$2,6()0, cost of street lights 
 burned 2,000 hours, costing .0443 per hour, and furnishing 270 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 RTJSHVILLE, Ind., burned the lights 2,190 hours, costing .0750 
 per hour, and furnishing 266 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ST. CHARLES, 111., light the streets with incandescents, and 
 after deducting all income, lights cost $15.42 per lamp per year. 
 
 ST. CLAIR, Pa., plant, $26,500 ; coal, !|1.00 per ton; operatingex- 
 penses, $4,437.40 ; interest at four per cent, $1,060 ; depreciation, :if 1,325 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $265 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,325 ; making 
 $8,412.40, less income, $6,321, and we have $2,091.40, cost of strept 
 lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0365 per hour, and furnishing 563 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 SOUTH BOSTON, Va., plant, $2,000; operating expenses, $812.55; 
 interest at six per cent, $120; depreciation, $100; taxes and insurance, 
 $20; making $1,052.55, cost of street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing 
 .0467 per hour, and furnishing 256 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 SALEM, Va., plant, $19,000 ; coal, 81 cents per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $2,625 ; interest at six per cent, $1,140 ; depreciation, $950; taxes 
 and insurance, $190; making $4,905, less income, $1,800, and we have 
 
 112
 
 $3,105, cost of street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing ,0370 per hour, 
 and furnishing 319 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ST. PETER, Minn., plant, $20,000; coal, $3.15 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, .*4,500 ; interest at five per cent, $1,000 ; depreciation, SI, 000; 
 taxes and insurance. $200 ; sinking fund for bonds. $500 ; making 
 $7,200. less income, $8,780, and we have $3,420, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .0476 per hour, and furnishing 420 caudle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 SHERMAN. Texas, plant, $21,00b; coal, $3.50 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $5,000; interest at six per cent, $1,2C0 ; depreciation, $1,050 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $210; sinking fund to pay bonds, .$500; making 
 $8,020, cost of street lights burned 4,000 hours, costing .0211 per hour, 
 and furnishing 948 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 SPRINGVILLE, N. Y., plant, $25,500 ; water power; operating 
 expenses, $1,000; interest at three percent, $705; depreciation, $1,275 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $255 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, .tl.OOO ; making 
 $4,295. less income, $1,500, and we have $2,795, cost of street lights 
 burned 4,000 hours, costing .0155 per hour, and furnishing 1,290 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 STUART, la,, plant, $11,400; coal, $1.50 per ton; operating 
 expenses, *G,277.77 ; interest at five per cent, $570 ; depreciation, $570 ; 
 taxes and water rent, $114 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $570 ; making 
 $8, 101.77, less income, $4,880.38, and we have $3,221.39, cost of street 
 lights being $18.94 per j-ear per lamp for IG candle power incandescent. 
 
 SHELBY, Ohio, plant, $38,000; coal, $1.85 per ton; operating ex- 
 penses, .$8,941.77 ; interest at six per cent. $2,280 ; depreciation, >!l,900 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $380; sinking fund to pay bonds, .$750: total, 
 $14,251.77, less income, $8,763.97, and we have .«5, 487.80, as cost of street 
 lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0409 per hour, and furnishing 48S 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 STATESVILLE, N. C, plant. $9.0U0 ; wood, $1.50 per cord ; op- 
 erating expenses, .$1,500; interest at five percent, S450 ; depreciation, 
 $450 ; taxes and insurance, $90 ; sinking fund to jmy bonds, .$400 ; mak- 
 ing $2,890, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0466 per 
 hoiir and furnishing 257 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 SANTA CRUZ, Cal., plant. $16,500; operating expenses. $7,250 ; 
 interest at six per cent, $990 ; depreciation, .$825 ; taxes and insurance, 
 $165; making $9,230, cost, of street lights burned 1,500 hours, costing 
 .0732 per hour, and furnishing 273 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 SPRINGFIELD, 111. The debt of the city had already reached 
 the limit allowed b}' law, therefore, they could not adopt municipal 
 ownership. 
 
 113 
 (8)
 
 Parties wishing to sell a plant, and to evade this law, proposed 
 installing a plant, and the city to levy a tax amounting to $113.33 per 
 lamp per year, and, when the surplus over cost of lights amounted to the 
 cost of plant, they would turn it over to the city. It was stated that the 
 cost of the plant would be $60,000. 
 
 This scheme was inaugurated in 1895, and the tax payers have paid 
 $113.33 per lamp per year, making a total of $176,258.80. When we 
 add depreciation at five per cent for the five years, making $29,599.30, 
 and interest, $21,000, clerk hire charged to the city, $3,000, taxes lost, 
 $2,500, insurance charged to the. city, $2,300, and $46,507.38 still due, 
 and it makes a total of $281,165.48, as cost of plant and operating, on an 
 average, 310 arc lamps for five years, deducting cost of plant, and lights 
 cost $138.48 per lamp per year. 
 
 In the above calculation attorneys' fees, stationery and printing, and 
 advertising charged to the city are not included. 
 
 They report plainly that city expended, or assumed, this amount. 
 If not for purchase of plant, must have been for running the lights. 
 
 In April. 1900, F. W. Tracy notified the aldermen that " All was in 
 readiness for the transfer of the plant to the city, and that there was still 
 due on the same $46,507.38." 
 
 A deed, drafted by the same party, was presented, which specified 
 that only $20,000 had been received in payment for the site of the plant 
 and the appliances. The aldermen accepted of the deed, and authorized 
 the payment of the $46,507.38. One alderman said, " There is no way to 
 divide the plant. It is all one plant. The same boilers and same steam 
 operate both street lights and private lights." What are the city 
 buying ? 
 
 That is, the city have paid $281,165.48, and get, in return, a second 
 hand plant, which is connected with, and cannot be separated from, the 
 commercial plant, and the use of 310 arc lights for five years. 
 
 The reason given to the public for not turning over the commercial 
 part of the plant was because the state law prohibited city operating 
 same, but that it will be turned over if the city can induce the legislature 
 to pass a bill authorizing them to use it and do a commercial business. 
 
 This is the public statement made, while privately they state that 
 the company do not wish such a bill passed, on the grounds of public 
 policy. That the company prefer to have cities forbidden to undertake 
 such business, and that thej^ are satisfied with the present plan, and are 
 opposed to any change. 
 
 They claim that there has only $20,000 been paid upon the plant, and 
 that there is $46,507.38 still due. This would make the cost of the 
 municipal part of plant, by their figures, $66,507.38, deducting this from 
 total and we have a balance of $214,658.10. 
 
 As there might arise, under these conditions, questions which would 
 be difficult answering, the following project was inaugurated and carried 
 through. 
 
 In June, 1900, the city council, by a vot(i, accepted a proposition 
 
 114
 
 from the Capital City Electric Company to buy the commercial i)laut for 
 $20,000, and lease the municipal plant for five years. 
 
 A special committee, appointed by the ma3-or to investigate and 
 ascertain the cost of the electric plant, reported that the cost of the 
 coniraercial plant was !i!.'jl,0r)4.5o, and the city sold it for 820,000. making 
 a net loss of *31,054..'J5 for the tax paj'ers upon the commercial plant. In 
 addition to this, the city agrees to forfeit $10,000 as damages, if they fail 
 to complj' with the conditions of the lease. 
 
 After all the outlay and loss already sustained, the city agree to 
 furnish, at their own expense, an electric plant complete, loose the 
 taxes, the interest on the investment, and the depreciation upon the 
 entire plant and repairs of same, furnish water free, and then, in 
 addition, pay $iiO jier lamp j^er year, payable on the first day of each 
 mouth, and, if not paid at that time, the city to pay seven per cent 
 interest. 
 
 The lease also requires the city to furnish a station building, boilers, 
 engines, pumps, and apparatus for running the commercial light 
 machinery' without charge to the compauj"- operating same, while the 
 entire income from the commercial plant goes to the company. 
 
 Here we have the history and working of a plan which was to give 
 the tax pa3'er8 a plant free. 
 
 The same plan was to be adopted at Des Moines, Iowa, b}- the same 
 parties, who desired to sell another plant, but the supreme court of that 
 state put a quietus upon the business, and the plan had to be abandoned. 
 
 SOMERVILLE, Tenn., plant, $5,000; coal, $2. Go per ton; oper- 
 ating expenpes, $1,800; interest at five per cent, $250; depreciation, 
 $250 ; taxes aud insurance, $50 ; sinking fund for bonds, $250 ; making 
 $2,000, less income, $1,080, and we have $020, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .0438 per hour, aud furnishing 456 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 ST. CHARLES, Mo., plant, $17,000 : coal, $1.85 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $4,700; interest at five per cent, $850; dei)reciation, $850; 
 taxes and insurance, $170 ; sinking fund for bonds, $750 ; making $7,320, 
 cofct of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0303 per hour, and 
 furnishing 508 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 SOUTH NORWALK, Conn., plant, $42,500; operating expenses, 
 i;7.7!)4.74; interest at four per cent, $1,700 ; depreciation, $2,125 ; taxes, 
 $425 ; sinking fund to paj- bonds, $2,125 : making $14,l()l).74, lessincom^ 
 from commerciariights and power, $5,304.78, and we have $8,804.90, cost 
 of 98 1,400-candle power street lights, being $90.45 per year, burned 
 only 1,900 hours, at an expense of .0470 per hour, and furnishing 294 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 On the 10th page of their 1897 report they give running expenses 
 and salaries at $3,000.28 ; and on the Uth page of 1899 report, their run- 
 ning expenses and salaries are $7,480.30, more than double, while the 
 
 115
 
 number of street lights in 1899 were two less than they were in 1897. 
 Since the above report .was made, the price of coal has advanced very 
 heavily, and the general superintendent of the plant stated to a news- 
 paper reporter " that the increase in the price of coal has taken away all 
 the profits during the last few months from the operation of the electric 
 lighting plant in South Norwalk. This, of course, will increase their 
 expenses, and they must meet the contingencies that arite in all business 
 enterprises, while if they had a contract with a private company, the loss 
 occasioned in this way would have been borne by the private companj'- 
 and not by the tax payers. 
 
 STAUNTON, 111., plant, f 18, 000; coal, 58 cents per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $2,620 ; interest at five per cent, $940 ; depreciation, $940 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $100 ; sinking fund for bonds, $350 ; making $4,950, 
 less income, $2,500, and we have $2,450, as cost of street lights burned 
 2.000 hours, costing .034 per hour, and furnishing 588 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 SMYRNA, Del., plant, $15,000; coal, $2.35 per ton; operating ex- 
 penses, $2,745 ; interest at five percent, $750 ; depreciation, $750 ; taxes 
 and insurance, $150 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $750 ; making $5,145, 
 less income, $3,000, and we have $2,145, as cost of street lights burned 
 2,300 hours, costing .042 per hour, and furnishing 28iJ candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 SHELBY, Mich., plant, $6,500; coal, $2.10 per ton; operating ex- 
 penses, $1,000 ; interest at six per cent, $390 ; depreciation, $325 ; taxes 
 and insurance, $65; sinking fund to pay bonds, $325 ; making $2,105, 
 less income, $1,200, and we have $905, cost of street lights burned 1,500 
 hours, costing ,0333 per hour, and furnishing 360 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 SHARPSBURG, JPenn. The superintendent reports that the 
 water works and electric lights are all run as one plant, and no separate 
 accounts kept, but, as near as they can tell, the lights cost, not includ- 
 ing interest, depreciation or taxes, about $60 per year. He also states 
 that they can dviplicate their plant for one-half what they paid for it. 
 
 SHICKSHINNY, Pa., plant, $8,000; coal, 85 cents per ton ; operat- 
 ing expenses, $1,800 ; interest atfive percent, $400 ; depreciation, $400; 
 taxes and insiirance, $50; sinking fund for bonds, $400; making $3,050, 
 less income, $1,200, and we have -If 1,850, as cost of street lights burned 
 2,200 hours, costing .035 per hour, and furnishing 571 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 SANTA CLARA, Cal., plant, $9,000; wood, $2.30 per cord ; oper- 
 atiLg expenses, $1,720; interest at six per cent, $540 ; depreciation, $450 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $90 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $300 ; making 
 $3,100, cost of street lights burned 1,200 hours, costing .0549 per hour, 
 and furnishing 364 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 116
 
 ST. JOSEPH, Mo., plant. sftOO.OOO ; coal, $1.20 per tou ; operntiu? 
 expenses, !J22,000 ; interest at tive per cent, .'!<4,.'JU0; depreciation, .*4.500 ; 
 taxes aud insurance, fSWO ; making $3I,UO0, cost of street lights "burned 
 2,200 hours, costinsr .030 per hour, and furnishing 512 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 SWANTON, Vt., plant, !5'4 1,476. 04 ; water power: operating 
 expen.ses. .•t^J.7S().G4 ; interest at tive per cent, !*!2,073.H0 ; depreciation, 
 $2,073.80 ; sinking fund to pay debt, .•?2,073.M0 ; making *!),008.04, less all 
 income, $4,647.52, and we have $4,360.52, cost of street lights burned 
 3,000 hours, costing .058 per hour, and furnishing 344 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 Their operating expenses have increased every year. In 1895 they 
 were $1,899.21, in 1896 were $2,375.62. in 1897 were $2,614.94, while in 
 1899 they were $2,786.64. 
 
 These expenses are taken as given by the officials in their reports to 
 the tux payers. 
 
 The street lights in 1895 cost $95.17, in 1896, $115.79, in 1897 they 
 cost $144.07, while in 1899, as shown by the village's own report, cost 
 $174.42 per Jampper year. On the 36th page of their report we find the 
 following statement : " Your trustees would rei>ort that, b}- the bursting 
 of a large imlley, one of our dynamos was badly injured, causing great 
 inconvenience to those using the lights, and an exi>eu8e of about $250 to • 
 the village, and making it necessary for us to purchase a new dynamo, 
 the expense of which was $3,000." 
 
 In addition to this amount, on page 30 are expenses, for setting this 
 dynamo, of $278.79, and in trustees' account is an item of $64.65 express 
 on armatures. 
 
 These items are reported as an addition to the plant, while they 
 should go to repairs, as the new dynamo onlj' takes the place of one 
 destroj-ed. 
 
 This dj-namo has evidently not been paid for. as it does not appear 
 in any of their accounts. 
 
 SALEM, 111., plant, $12,000: coal, $1.50 per ton ; operating expenses, 
 $2,400; interest at tive per cent, $600; depreciation, $600: taxes and 
 insurance, $120 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $400 ; making $4,120, less 
 income, $2,000, and we have $2,120, cost of street lights burned 1.500 
 hours, costing .0293 per hour, aud furnishing 682 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 TOLEDO, Ohio. One of the most striking object lessons on muni- 
 cipal ownership in this country is at Toledo, Ohio. In 1890 they installed 
 a gas plant, and the history of this business is a fair sample of hundreds 
 of other cities. The testimony of Manager Herton shows that the city 
 had spent $1,250,000 in installing a municipal gas plant, and all of the 
 l)onds issued for this plant are still unpaid. Ex-inspector Meissner, who 
 was also president of the board of aldermen, testitied as follows : 
 
 117
 
 ' ' That over one-half of the plant was not in the proper condition to 
 operate, owing to defective workmanship, and incompetent help, at the 
 time the pipes were laid. When the pipe liners laid the pipe through 
 the city fields they did it without the aid of a topographical map of the 
 country. They went across streams and ravines without making drips, 
 and when the line became defective there were no drips to strengthen it. 
 In the mean time, the engineer had been discharged, and new ones 
 hired, who knew nothing of the work of their predecessors, as no maps 
 were made. Many 'obstructions were left in the pipe by the employes. 
 When they stopped work at night they would leave their tools in the 
 line, and forget all about them in the morning. The work would be 
 continued with the tools in the line. One-third of the labor on this 
 project was thrown away, I remember that four barrels of water were 
 taken from a four inch line. This was due to incompetent labor and 
 leaky joints. I saw this, but had no authority to correct it. I know of 
 leases made by the city in territory that the Northwestern would not 
 touch. The city took the leases, and if a gasser was struck the owner 
 was paid for it at the rate of a million feet. That was when wells were 
 measured by the million ; now a 700,00()-foot well is a hummer. 
 
 "If an oiler was struck, the city gave it up, and had no oil rights ; 
 the owner paid the expense of drilling the well and let it go at that. The 
 way in which the well would be worked, when the city was to buy, was 
 something after this manner : They would cap the well until it showed 
 a pressure of 750 pounds to the square inch, which would be a two or 
 three million foot well. It would be measured, and the city would pay 
 for it at that rate. After two weeks it would not be good for 700 cubic 
 feet, and sometimes the wells would peter out in three or four days. 
 Many people drilled wells and the city bought them, and the drillers did 
 not care whether the wells were any good or not, so long as they got 
 their pay. The trustees hired incompetent persons in important 
 positions. A man was employed to secvire leases, and go from house to 
 house to canvass for subscribers. Very soon he bobbed up as an oil con- 
 tractor, and is now working in the field for the city. Where did he get his 
 capital ? Every month the reports of the trustees show so much paid to 
 him for drilling wells. That is where the leaks in the department come 
 in. 
 
 " There is a man in the city's employ now, and is drawing a salary of 
 over $2,000, who was employed at one time by R. W. Smith & Company. 
 He told me that Smith used to figure on laying pipe for the city, and 
 would make specifications at about 20 per cent profit above estimated 
 cost of materials and labor, and would then add 20 per cent for contin- 
 gencies. The trustees would make contracts at these prices, and the 
 lines would be laid, and 25 per cent of the material was never used. 
 The city hired a man to go from house to house and induce subscribers 
 to change from the Northwestern to the city line ; if they did not do it 
 they were branded as not patriotic. I know of cases where the changes 
 in plumbing made necessary by the change were paid by the city, and 
 the subscriber has not paid enough revenue to make good the plumber's 
 
 118 .
 
 bills." This is the way business is maDaged under municipal ownership, 
 and then the claim is made that, with such management, thej' can furnish 
 lights cheaper than private companies. 
 
 City Accountant Whittlesley prepared a statement showing that the 
 operating expenses for four years htwe exceeded the total income by 
 $24,328.50. When it became evident that municipal ownership was a 
 failure, the maj'or conceived the plan of leasing the works to his syndi- 
 cate. Under this plan the mayor was to turn over to the syndicate the 
 entire property of the municipal plant, the syndicate were to erect a plant 
 for the manufacture of gas, they having the right to sell any and all of 
 said city plant, as they might liud necessary or desirable. The entire 
 proceeds from the sale of gas. and all moneys, to be paid to this sj-ndi- 
 cate, and expended by them as they thought proper. The sj'ndicate 
 should have the right to conduct the business as they pleased, expend 
 any amount of monej' they thought proper in installing the plant, pay 
 whatever exorbitant salaries they pleased, employ any number of men 
 in the business ; in fact, have the most complete monopoly of the 
 business until the profits amounted to enough to pay back to them all of 
 the principal they had invested, with live per cent semi-annual interest 
 and all expenses of operation. That is, Ma3'or Jones patriotic 83-nfbcate 
 would run the business until the plant was practically worn out ; then 
 the city could have it by paying them for the entire outlay and expenses, 
 with five per cent interest for the full time. The city must pay what 
 the entire business cost when new, and take an old worn out affair. 
 
 The aldermen did not appreciate this generous offer, and rejected it. 
 Then it was decided to sell the plant outright. The mayor claimed that 
 the plant, which had cost si. 250, 000, was now worth 8500.000, but when 
 the bids were opened it was found that the Jones syndicate had offered 
 $300,000 for it. It was stated that the object of this syndicate was to 
 protect the interest of the tax payers. That is, the propert}' that cost 
 $1,250,000, and which it was claimed was now worth 8500,000, they would 
 buy for 8300,000, so as to protect the city's interest. If the property 
 was worth 8500,000, why did not this S3'ndicate, if they wish to protect 
 the city, bid that amount, instead of 8300,000 ? The maj'or saj's you 
 cannot make a contract but some lawyer could drive through it with a 
 horse and wagon. If this is the case, would not the contract referred to 
 above, made and offered to the city by this syndicate for leasing the 
 plant, be in the same condition, and would it not be the syndicate's 
 lawyer who would drive the horse and wagon ? The plant cost $1,250,000 ; 
 add interest and taxes lost, together with the loss in operating it, during 
 the past four years, of 824,328.50, and we have over two millions, not 
 including the loss in operating previous to 1805. After only ten years' 
 use, the highest bid they could get for this property was 8300,000, making 
 a net loss to the tax payers of 8 1, TOO, 000 in ten j-ears. 
 
 After such an experience and loss as this, with the fraud and swind- 
 ling disclosed in the testimony of the president of the board, the gas 
 trustees, composed of three men, while the council had the business in 
 hand and were considering what action better be taken to protect th^ 
 
 119
 
 city, inaugurated and secretly carried through at a star chamber session 
 a contract that, under the circumstances, has no parallel in this country 
 in its infringement upon the rights of tax payers. If this contract was 
 for the best interest of the city, why was it not made public and the 
 150,000 citizens of Toledo allowed an opportunity to examine and discuss 
 it ? Instead of this it was rushed through secretly for the very purpose 
 of defeating any action or examination on the part of tax payers. 
 
 Here we have an example of what can and will be done by advocates 
 of municipal ownership when they are given the control of public busi- 
 ness. The gas trustees evidently adopted the same system as was used 
 by the gas ring in Philadelphia, regardless of the public's rights. This 
 syndicate, by this contract, are to furnish fuel gas of 500 heat unites at 
 their station, to be measured there with a meter. It is then to be con- 
 veyed into the pipes belonging to the city, which not only the mayor, 
 but other prominent citizens have testified are of no value, and that one- 
 half of them are in such a condition that the gas flows into the ground 
 and streams in such quantities that it causes bubbles to be blown in the 
 water. This loss must be borne by the city. They must also make all 
 repairs, pay for all piping, light and extinguish all lamps ; in fact, as- 
 sume the entire expense of the business except manufacturing the gas 
 at the station. Not only that, but they bind the city to furnish custom- 
 ers for this syndicate. The syndicate have about as fat a job as could be 
 desired, and this contract is for ten years, thus giving them an absolute 
 monopoly for that time. Here is a star-chamber contract that the syn- 
 dicate's lawyer, if he desires, can drive a four-horse team through with- 
 out friction. 
 
 The average leakage in gas pipes, when they are in good condition, 
 is about twelve per cent, and the heavier the pressure at the works the 
 more leakage. With pipes in such condition as shown at Toledo, the 
 loss must exceed fifty per cent. 
 
 It is for the interest of the syndicate to carry as high a pressure as 
 possible, because they are paid for every thoixsand feet that the meter 
 registers at their station, and meters are never tired. 
 
 BY THE HON. GXJY G. MA J OK, MAYOR. 
 
 Our city has had a rather dear experience trying to furnish our citi- 
 zens gas. 
 
 The state legislature, some six years ago, passed an enabling act, 
 authorizing a bond issue of $750,000, same to be used for gas purposes. 
 Before the bonds were issued or the money expended, the proposition 
 was submitted to a vote of the people— sixty-three per cent favored the 
 expenditure. The entire amoaut was expended, then certificates of in- 
 debtedness were issued for $600,000, afterward unpaid bills amounting 
 to about $3fi0,000, that were paid by general refunding twenty-five-year 
 four per cent bonds. The gas line has not paid interest or principal, 
 and is to-day losing about $2,500 per month. 
 
 It is my opinion that the plant would not sell for $150,000 to-day, as 
 
 120
 
 it is built of wrought irou, and the life of wrought iron pipe in the ground 
 is not over six or eight 3'ear8. 
 
 Our city made au experiment similar to this in 1872, built a S3'8tem 
 of water works that cost .*1, 000,000, issued eight per cent bonds. These 
 bonds were refunded in 181)3 and 1894 at four and one-half and live per 
 cent. 
 
 During the twenty years the water works department did not pay a 
 dollar of its principal or interest. 
 
 Persouall}', under our form of government, I do not believe munic- 
 ipalities should engage in business, the above being examples why they 
 should not, 
 
 PUBLIC OWNERSHIP VIVISECTED. 
 
 BY EDWARD WISNER. 
 
 Toledo is a city of nearly 150,000 people, the equal in intelligence 
 and enterprise of an3' similar community' in the world It is a city of 
 beautiful homes and thriving industry, the second railway center in the 
 world, and situated to comjnand a large share of the commerce of the 
 unsalted seas. In no city in this country are the masses better clothed, 
 better fed and better housed. 
 
 Toledo has had some experiences in owning public utilities, and the 
 balance sheet is interesting reading at this time. 
 
 Toledo built what is known as the Woodville railroad. 
 
 It cost .*448,000. The city sold it to the Penusjivauia Railroad Com- 
 pany for,*225,000, or $223,000 less than it cost. The city borrowed s432. 000 
 of the original cost and gave her bonds bearing 7 o-lO per cent, jmyable 
 in thirtj' years. The bonds will become due next year. When due the 
 city will have paid 1*040,080 in interest, and principal will have to be car- 
 ried along until the present generation shall have bequeathed to pos- 
 terity l)oth the debt and municipal problems. 
 
 Toledo owns a natural gas outtit, consisting of pipe line, gas 
 leases, etc. 
 
 The city borrowed fl, .000, 000 to go into the gas business. This en- 
 terprise has paid .'f!lU0,0UO gross to the citj', but not one cent of interest, 
 which is running at the rate of $67.;'500 per annum. Hy the time the nat- 
 ural gas bonds are due the citj' will have paid over a half million dollars 
 in interest in excess of the $100,000 received, and will leave its tax 
 payers burdened with the original debt of .f 1,500,000. 
 
 The value of the natural gas plant is the subject of much discussion 
 at the present time. The citj' has recently refused a cash offer of 
 $250,000 for it, and has entered into a contract with a New York sj'udi- 
 cate for the manufacture of fuel gas to supplement the natural gas 
 supply, agreeing to pay twenty cents per thousand up to 2,000,000 cubic 
 feet per day ; when the gas taken exceeds that amount the i)rice is to be 
 18 cents. The city reserves the right to buy the supplementary gas plant 
 to be erected by the syndicate at any time after two 3'ears. capitalized on 
 a five per cent net earning basis, but not to exceed $250,000 for a plant 
 
 121
 
 capable of making 3,000,000 feet of gas per clay. In any event the nat- 
 ural gas experiment has been a costly one. 
 
 It is only fair to state that the advocates of municipal ownership ex- 
 cuse this failure on the ground that the natural gas supply became ex- 
 hausted or nearly so— a disaster which no foresight could provide against. 
 It should also be stated that a competitor under private ownership, oc- 
 cupying the same field has made the business profitable and is still pay- 
 ing dividends, thus demonstrating the superiority of private business 
 management over public management. 
 
 It is a well-known fact, and one which will hardly be disputed, that 
 what is done by the government now is done wastefully, and it is possi- 
 ble for the government to conduct its business as it does only because 
 through its taxing form it commands the profits of all the productive in- 
 dustry of the country. The postoflfice department, which is so often 
 held up to us as a fine example of government business ability is able to 
 run only because it has the United States treasury back of it ; as a busi- 
 ness proposition it loses directly about $40,000 per day every daj' in the 
 year — indirectly it undoubtedly loses as much more. From a business 
 standpoint there should be considered interest on its plant, which would 
 swell the deficit enormously. There should be charged a large sum an- 
 nually for depreciation, repairs, and renewals of public buildings ; at 
 present no charge is made to the post office department for janitor ser- 
 vice, heat and light in the government buildings, these expenses being 
 charged to the treasury department. If everything were charged to the 
 postoffice department, which is a legitimate business expense, it would 
 undoubtedly double the direct deficit, making a net business loss of ap- 
 proximately $80,000 per day — a sum -which for the year equals the total 
 average'wealth of nearly 30,000 American citizens ; in other words, the 
 accumulated savings of nearly 30,000 average Americans are ^required 
 every year to make good the losses sustained in the admittedly best con- 
 ducted business enterprise in which the government is engaged, and this 
 amount has to be supplied by forced contributions frOm the people of 
 the United States, who know enough to conduct their business on busi- 
 ness principles. It must, of course, be admitted that the benefits of the 
 postal system are ample compensation for all it costs the people in the 
 way of government taxation to make up deficits. But while the people 
 are able to pay the losses sustained in the conduct of the most economi- 
 cally run department of its government, it need hardly be stated that 
 were all productive industry run as socialism would have it, by the gov- 
 ernment and all of it run as the best of it now is, it would be only a 
 short run to bankruptcy of both government and people. It is a fact no- 
 torious and beyond dispute that in prett;y much all the ordinary business 
 transactions the government gets woefully swindled. It pays more for 
 any piece of land it may happen to want than individuals or corporations 
 pay under similar circumstances. It pays $125 a head for mules and 
 sells them a few months afterwardior $40 or $50 per head. Any wholesale 
 grocer who would do business on the same plan that the commissary de- 
 partment does would be bankrupt in less than a month. The possession 
 
 122
 
 of a governmeut coutraot is looked upon as a bonanza, because from a 
 business standpoint the pay for propertj' or service furnished is both 
 sure and liberal. Indeed, so universal is the rule that it will be 
 generally admitted without either argument or citation of example. 
 Nobody will contend that municipal government fares any l)etter from 
 a business standpuint than does the general government. The exhibit 
 of Toledo's business trausactiou, made in another place, and the expe- 
 rience of every large city between the two oceans, are but an illustration 
 of how municipalities conduct business. 
 
 If you had an agent conducting a part of j'our business, and that 
 agent had uniformly been expensive, protiigate and corrupt, -what would 
 you think of a proposition to turn over to him conduct of all j'our 
 business aftairs, and to place your fortunes in his keeping. Your answer 
 must be that such a thing would be preposterous. But that is exactly 
 the proposition of the socialist. The state and municipality necessarily 
 have to conduct some l)usiness, but such business has always been done 
 with an expense and extravagance which would mean hopeless bank- 
 ruptcy were all business so conducted. Common sense and common 
 prudence require a positive "no" to the demands of the socialist. 
 
 BUSINESS BY POLITICIANS. 
 
 Under our form of government the business of municipalities and 
 the state is in the hands of the politician. Our political system has de- 
 veloped the boss. New York city furnishes perhaps the best example of 
 boss rule, because New York has the greatest municipal business to con- 
 duct, and while other communities are not bled to the same extent, yet 
 through the entire country may be found a similar rule of the political 
 dictator, each community in proportion to the business and revenues to 
 be handled. 
 
 Richard Croker, the Tammany chief, who i^ practically king of our 
 metropolis, began the bussing business a poor man. and without any vis- 
 ible means of making even a decent living, he has become immensely 
 wealth}'. It is a fact notorious that everj^ legitimate business which 
 wants fair treatment must put up cold cash, a part of which finds its way 
 to the boss' pocket. Illegitimate business which wants protection and 
 license must divide the spoils with Croker : every man who wants an of- 
 fice or a contract with the city must " see" Croker or his agents, and 
 make his peace by use of the long crreen. 
 
 It will be said in oflset that in New York ali'airs are worse managed 
 than in other places, which may be true, but everyl)od3' who knows any- 
 thing about government affairs knows that everywhere is the man with 
 a "pull." and that the dilTerence between New York and other places is 
 a matter of degree only. 
 
 Business conduct of great enterprise by the state is nothing new and 
 we have abundant example in this country. 
 
 The state of Michigan built the Michigan Central railroad from 
 Detroit to Kalamazoo at a cost of *3, 500, 000 and sold it for S'3. 000,000, 
 and that is one of the brightest examples of railroad building by the 
 
 123
 
 state in this couutry. Illinois built fifty-eight miles of railroad from 
 Mendosia to Springfield, at a cost of $1,000,000 and sold it for $21,000. 
 Illinois' experience in the railroad Inisiness cost her $6,000,000. Massachu- 
 setts sunk $14,000,000 in the same line. The state of Pennsylvania built 
 and operated what was known as the Allegheny Portage railroad. While 
 operating it the running expenses amounted to $3,161,000, and its gross 
 receipts to only $2,985,000. In "Railways andEepublic," by J. F. Hud- 
 son, may be found the following : 
 
 The canals and railways built by that state (Pennsylvania) and op- 
 erated by it for nearly twenty j^ears, are well known as an illustration 
 of the evils of political management in business enterprises. They are 
 salient examples of the demoralizing effect which politics and public 
 works can exert on each other ; and the constant strife for their patron- 
 age, its use for political rewards, and the expensive administration and 
 unsatisfactory revenues of the roads finally led the state to part with 
 them. 
 
 It is not necessary to inquire why men -will not do business for the 
 public as economically as they will for themselves. The fact that they 
 do not is sufficient. Even that great reformer and advocate of socialism, 
 Hazen S. Pingree, now governor of Michigan, falls down when the test 
 is applied. As mayor of Detroit in 1897, in a special message to the 
 council, he made this statement : 
 
 "It is well known that the total amount of money invested in street 
 railways m the city of Detroit is not more than $5,000,000.'' 
 
 And yet this same Hazen S. Pingree is trjung to buy this same street 
 railway for the cit}' of Detroit, and is willing to have the city pay 
 $17,500,000 for it. He would hardly buy it for himself at that price, 
 
 TAUNTON, Mass. , plant, $145,301 ; have 1,200 candle power lamps, 
 and, as stated by the Gas and Electric Light Commissioners, cost $73.12 
 per year, burned 2,144 hours, costing .034 per hour, and furnishing 352 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 TITTJSVILLE, Pa., plant, $16,320 ; natural gas ; operating expenses, 
 $4,750.38; interest at five per cent, $816 ; depreciation, $816; taxes and 
 insurance, $160; making $6,548.38, cost of street lights burned 3,500 
 hours, costing .0157 per hour, and furnishing 1,273 candle power per 
 hour for one cent. 
 
 TOPEKA, Kan., plant, $76,434.85; coal, $2 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $10,484.60; interest at five per cent. $3,820.74; depreciation, 
 $3,820.74; taxes and insurance, ^764; making .$18,900.08, cost of street 
 lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0335 per hour, and furnishing 597 
 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 TARENTUM, Pa., plant, $32,000 ; coal, $1.50 per ton ; operating 
 expenses, $7,000 ; interest at five per cent, $1,600 ; depreciation, $1,600 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $300; sinking fund to pay bonds, $1,000 ; making 
 
 124
 
 $11, .000, less income, 85,000, and we have $6,000, as cost of street ligrhts 
 burned 4,000 hours, custiuj^ .023'J per hour, and furnishing o02 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 VINTON, Iowa, plant, .*20,000: coal, 81.88 per ton; operating 
 exi)euse«, ^-1,000 ; interest at five per cent, 81,000 ; depreciation, il 1,000 ; 
 taxes and insurance, $200; sinking fund to pay bonds, $320; making 
 $0,.020, lees income, 84,300, and we have $2,220, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,800 hours, costing .0280 per hour, and furnishing 409 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 WHEELING, W. Va., plant, $125,000 ; coal, 81.09 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, 822.1 10.04 ; interest at six per cent, 87,500 ; depreciation, 
 •86,250 ; taxes and insurance, 81,250 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $8,000 ; 
 making 845,110.04, cost of street lights burned 4,000 hours, costing .0225 
 per hour, and furnishing 800 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 WESTFIELD, N. Y., plant. $18,000; coal, $2.10 per ton; oper- 
 ating expenses, 82,000 ; interest at four per cent, $520 ; depreciation, 
 86.50 ; taxes and insurance, 8130 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, 8600 ; making 
 $6,100, less income, $2,000, and we have $4,100, as cost of street lights 
 burned 3,120 hours, costing ,0164 per hour, and furnishing 1,219 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 WASECA, Minn., plant, $20,000; coal, 82.85 per ton; operating 
 expenses, 84,875: interest at six per cent, $1,200 ; depreciation, 81000 ; 
 taxes and insurance, 82U0 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, 5^750 ; making 
 88,125, less income, .S5,130, and we have 82,894, as cost of street lights 
 burned 1,500 hours, costing .0507 per hour, and furnishing 394 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 WAKEFIELD, Mass.. plant, $187,.500 ; use 1,200 candle power 
 lamps and cost, as made by the Gas and Electric Light Coinmissionera, 
 $83.30 per year, burned 1,365 hours, costing .06 per hour, and furnishing 
 200 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 WELLSTON. Ohio, plant, $30,000; coal, 80 cents per ton; oper- 
 ating expenses, $4,600; interest at six per cent, .$1,800; depreciation, 
 ¥1,500 ; taxes and insurance, 8300; making $8,200, less income, $4,000, 
 and we have $4,200, cost of street lights burned 2,000 hours, costing .0318 
 per hour, and furnishing 377 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 WELLS RIVER, Vt., i)lant, $1.5,000 ; water power ; operating 
 expenses. .$500 ; interest at four per cent, .$600 ; depreciation, $750 ; 
 taxes and insurance, •'?100 : sinking fund to pay bonds, $7.00 ; making 
 $2,700, less income, $1,143, and we have $1,.5'")7, cost of street lights 
 burned 2,000 hours, and costing $24.71 per lamp per j'ear for incandescent 
 lights. 
 
 125
 
 WINTERSET, Iowa, plant. $20,000 ; operating expenses, $4,000 ; 
 interest at four per cent, $800 ; depreciation, $1,000; taxes and insurance, 
 $200 ; sinking fund to pay bonds, $900 ; making $6,900, less income, 
 $5,000, and we have $1,900, cost of street lights burned 1,400 hours, 
 costing .0335 per hour, and furnishing 358 candle power per hour for one 
 cent. 
 
 WATERVLIET. N. Y., plant, $84,000 ; operating expenses, $8,000; 
 interest at four per cent, 81,360; depreciation, $1,700; taxes and 
 insurance, $340; making $11,400, cost of street lights burned 4, COO 
 hours, costing .0247 per hour, and furnishing 809 candle power per hour 
 for one cent. 
 
 WILMINGTON, Ohio, plant. $30,000 ; they report that the ,entire 
 cost of lights per year, including interest and depreciation, is $3,200. 
 
 An examination shows a pay roll of $2,200 ; interest at four per cent, 
 $1,200 ; depreciation, $1,500: fuel, $1,500 ; making $0,420 per year, not 
 including carbons, repairs, oil, waste, renewals or taxes. 
 
 WAPAKONETA, Ohio, plant, $31,000: coal, $2.15 per ton ; oper- 
 ating expenses, $5,134.08; interest paid, as given ))j citj' clerk, $1,820; 
 depreciation, $1,550; taxes and water rent, $310; sinking fund to pay 
 bonds, $950 ; making $9,764.08, less income from private consumers, 
 $4,740.74, and we have $5,023.34, cost of 69 street lights, being $72.80 per 
 lamp per year, burned 3.2U0 hours, costing .033 per hour, and furnishing 
 606 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 YPSILANTI, Mich., plant, $25,000; water power; operating 
 expenses, $3,000 ; interest at four per cent, $1,000 ; depreciation, $1,250; 
 taxes and insurance, $250 ; making a total of $5,500, cost of street lights 
 burned 1,900 hours, costing .0273 per hour, and furnishing 733 candle 
 power per hour for one cent. 
 
 CRAWFORD VILLE, Ind., plant, $105,000; operating expenses, 
 $16,936.22 ; interest at four per cent, $4,200 ; depreciation, |5,2G0 ; taxes, 
 $1,000 ; making $27,386, less all income, including $240 for lighting city 
 buildings and lamps sold, $10,697.00, and we have $16,689, being $115.89 
 per lamp per year, burned on moonlight schedule to 1 a. m. , costing 
 .0526 per hour, and furnishing 380 candle power per hour for one cent. 
 
 The above figures, except depreciation and taxes, are the same as 
 given in the superintendent's report to the city council for year ending 
 May 31-, 1900. 
 
 In their construction account is an item of $12,000 for free wiring. 
 
 See also page 74. 
 
 126
 
 LEGAL AND OFFICIAL OPINIONS FROM SOME 
 OF THE MOST PROMINENT MEN IN THE 
 NATION. 
 
 JUDGE COOLEY, Interstate Commerce Commissioner, says : 
 " There seems, therefore, to be strong, if not controlling reasons, when- 
 ever the supply of a public convenience can assume the form of a private 
 and continuous business, for permitting it to take that form and for 
 granting to individuals the necessar}' franchise for the purpose." 
 
 He further says, "That this species of legislation has been exceed- 
 ingly mischievous in its results, that it has created a great burden of 
 public debt on which, in a large number of cases, the anticipated benefit 
 was never received, and that, as is likely to be the case where municipal 
 governments take part in projects foreign to the purposes of their 
 creation, it has furnished unusual facilities for fraud and public i)lunder, 
 and led almost, at last, to discontent, sometimes even to disorder and 
 violence." 
 
 Ex-GOV. RUSSELL of Massachusetts voiced the people when he 
 stated before a committee, "That the matter involves a most serious 
 question of public policy, namely, whether it is wise, necessary and safe 
 to reverse the policy that has governed towns and cities for 2o0 years and 
 allow them to go into these enterprises with all the hazards, risks, and 
 liabilities that attend the investment of money in private industrj'. I am 
 one of those who believe that it is the duty of government not to crush 
 out individual enterprise and energy, but to aid it. I believe in the 
 principle of government helping men to make the most of themselves, 
 and industries to make the most of themselves, but not in a paternal 
 government to which we must all look for leave to act, or think, or 
 speak. And I believe, on that principle, it is of doubtful expediency 
 for a state or government to undertake to control, in this way, private 
 enterprises." 
 
 MR. IVINS says : ' ' It is because we fear our army of office- 
 holders that conservative men look upon the paternal and regulating 
 tendency of goverment with undisguised dread." 
 
 W. T. BURT of Wheeling, West Va., a city which has run its gas 
 plant since 1870, says: " Owing to politics our city has not been success- 
 ful in getting good, competent public servants. Unfortunately, our 
 civil service is not separate from politics." 
 
 127
 
 JOHN MITCHELL of Richmond, a member of the board of al- 
 dermen of that city, says : ' ' All positions are filled by the spoils sys- 
 tem, llepviblicans rigidly excluded." 
 
 W. W. COOK of the New York Bar, says: "If our large cities 
 shoukrmanage their natural monopolies their governments would be- 
 come El Doradoes of political freeboters and mountebanks." 
 
 HON. SETH LOWE, ex-mayor of Brooklyn and president of Co- 
 lumbia College, says : " Few American cities have exercised so great 
 a competency in the business already in their hands as to justify a very 
 strong presumption that they would manage lighting works." 
 
 PROF. GRAY says: "It is bej'ond any doubt whatever, much 
 more in harmonj^ with the theory and philosophy of democratic govern- 
 ment than municipal ownership." 
 
 PROF. WHITNEY says : " That an engineer loses his professional 
 dignity and standing by entering the service of a city. Every new posi- 
 tion placed at the disposal of the city officials tightens the grasp of the 
 ' ring boss ' upon the treasury of the city." 
 
 PROF. ASHLEY of Harvard University, who was at Toronto 
 at the time the changes were made in their municipal management, says: 
 " I am thoroughly in favor of private management. I came to this 
 opinion after four years' experience of Toronto city government, starting 
 originally with a very strong leaning toward municipal management." 
 
 PROF. ROSEWATER of Columbia College, says: "If we 
 turn now to the cost statistics of electric lighting under municipal own- 
 ership of the plant, we strike a complication no less j^serious. At the 
 very beginning of every such investigation we find ovirselves in the 
 chaos of American municipal bookkeeping. When two cities employ 
 the same system of accounts, when in the same cities the reports of the 
 different departments furnish irreconcilable data, the statiHtican must 
 seek to extricate himself as best he can. It would scarcely be stating 
 the case too strongly if you should say that out of the probable 100 mu- 
 nicipalities owning their own electric lighting plants, not five could pre- 
 sent an intelligible showing of their operation for the period of one 
 year. The blame for this does not attach entirely to the city officials, 
 for conditions exist in many localities which render a clear financial 
 account a thing next to an impossibility. 
 
 PRES. HOPKINS of the National Street Lighting Association 
 is opposed to the municipal ownership of electric light plants. And 
 this conclusion has been reached, he says, after years of careful study 
 of the comparative merits presented by the operation of public 
 service systems by private contract and by municipalities, and 
 from a comparison of statistics of relative economy and efficiency col- 
 
 128
 
 Iftted from ftU the Inrper cities of the country. Mr. Hopkins said if pol- 
 itics conlcl be eliminnted from the jiroposition of municipal ownership, 
 it mitrht prove to be a desirable system of snppljiuj^ pul)lic8ervice, but as 
 lou^ as politics is permitted to enter into the administration of public 
 service, there is little to be gained in placing: expensive electric, gas or 
 water plants in the bands of untutored and inexperienced politicians. 
 
 Mr. Hopkins is strongly opposed to the muuicijtal otvuership of 
 electric light plants, or gas plants either for that matter. 
 
 •' When I Hrst became interested in cit}' lighting." he said, " I was 
 enthusiastic over muuicipal light plants, and especially over municii)al 
 electric light plants. I thought it was the only way a city should be 
 lighted. I have devoted several years since then to the collection of 
 statistics, and have made a very careful and exhaustive study of the 
 question. And as a result I have come to the conclusion that there is 
 nothing whatever in it. 
 
 "Politicians do not make good electricians, and I regret to say this 
 country is not yet ready for muuicipal electric light plants. 
 
 "Xow 3'ou tell mej'ouhave an ordinance pending before your council 
 now for the erection of a municipal electric light plant. Well, in the 
 first place, if the ordinance is passed you will have to issue !5i200,000 or 
 •5800,000 bonds. This is just that much property taken from the tax 
 duplicate, for if the plant were not erected by the city it would be 
 erected by private capital and, of course, it -would be taxable. Thea 
 there is the interest on these bonds, in itself a large item. So j^ou start 
 out with two very burdensome losses. 
 
 "But the most important consideration of the municipal ownership 
 of electric light plants is that by the time the bonds issued for the 
 erection of the plant are paid, the machinery and apparatus, ahva^'s 
 expensive, are totally out of date. Electricity is making rajnd strides, 
 and a plant that was modern ten j'ears ago is long since out of date now. 
 And what is the result? The plant that cost $300,000 to build ten years 
 ago is little better in comparison with modern equipment than a pile of 
 rubbish. 
 
 "But the most serious objection to municipal ownership at this 
 time is the fact that all muuicipal service plants are controlled by 
 politics. As I said before, politicians or ward heelers do not make good 
 electricians. Yoii cannot get the best electricians to run municipal 
 electric light plants, when political pulls are the accepted recommenda- 
 tion. Then again, there are'so many changes in administrations, that it 
 would be almost impossible to keep good men in charge, if they were to 
 be secured. A ward heeler has no business handling expensive electri- 
 cal machinery, when the mere turning of a switch the wrong way would 
 entail the loss of thousands of dollars. There may come a time when 
 muuicipal ownership may be i)rotitabl3' established, with politics elimi- 
 nated, but the country is not ready for it yet, and, therefore, I am 
 opposed to it now." 
 
 129 
 
 (9)
 
 HON. CARROLL D. WRIGHT, Commissioner of Labor, at the 
 meeting of the American Economic Association, in the discussion 
 of municipal ownership, gave the true facts regarding the so-called in-, 
 vestigations and reports of committees and mayors of various cities. 
 
 He said, " That whenever in an American city the question of mu- 
 nicipal or private ownership had come before the people the first prac- 
 tical step taken had been the appointment of a junketing committee 
 of inquiry to investigate the methods and results of competing systems 
 in other cities, and that such committees, beginning their studies in 
 ignorance, had completed them in confusion of mind a thousand-fold 
 worse than the original ignorance. " 
 
 MR. GREENOUGH confirmed this statement, and explained that the 
 success of the Massachusetts Commission, in obtaining exact and truth- 
 ful balance sheets, is due to the immiinity from unnecessary competition 
 and from blackmailing raids which existing companies enjoy under the 
 protection of the commission, in return for the publicity and regulation 
 of charges Avhich the commission forces upon them. 
 
 SENATOR LOUD, chairman of Commission on Postoffices, says : 
 " It is an incontestible fact that the government cannot conduct any line 
 of business as economically as an individual or a corporation can," 
 
 DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 In this opinion Justices Field, Allen, Knowlton, Morton and 
 Lathrop, say: "We are not aware of any necessity why cities and 
 towns should undertake this form of business any more than many 
 others which have always been conducted by private enterprise, and we 
 are not called upon to consider what extraordinary powers the common- 
 wealth may exercise or mfey authorize cities and towns to exercise in 
 extraordinary exigencies for the safety of the state or the welfare of the 
 inhabitants. If there be any advantage to the inhabitants in buying 
 and selling coal and wood for fuel at the risk of the community, on a 
 large scale, and on what has been called the co-operative plan, we are of 
 the opinion that the constitution does not contemplate this as one of the 
 ends for which the government was established, or as a public service for 
 which cities and towns may be authorized to tax their inhabitants." 
 
 JUSTICE WILDE of the supreme court of Massachusetts said : 
 *' The limitation upon the power and authority of towns to enter into 
 contracts aTid stipulations is a wise and salutary provision of laws, not 
 only as it protects the rights and interests of the majority of the legal 
 voters, but as it may not infrequently prove beneficial to the interests of 
 the majority, who may be hurried into rash and unprofitable specula- 
 tions by some popular and delusive excitement, to the influence of which 
 even wise and considerate men are sometimes liable." 
 
 130
 
 DR. A. T. HADLEY, president of Yale University, uu imlilic t\iu\ 
 private ownership, says : " To those who h>ok at the suhjec-t superticially 
 it sometimes seems as thourrh private enterprise meant manap^emeut of in- 
 dustry by the few for the few, state control management by the few, but 
 for the people, and direct state ownership management l)y the people 
 and for the people. This view of the matter is urged by mau}' who are 
 anxious for a change in the direction of increased state activity. How- 
 ever, it can be readily shown to be in niau^' respects fallacious. 
 
 '"In the lirst i)lace, whatever S3'stem is adopted, the management will 
 be in the hands of the few. *•*•*# xhe legislature, as at 
 present constituted, is elected for purposes other than the control of in- 
 dustrial enterprise, and that this coml)ination of functions affords man- 
 ifold opportunities for misunderstanding and corruption. Control of 
 orticials bj' the l)allot has the disadvantage that the responsibility is re- 
 mote. Elections occur at such infreciuent intervals that there is an op- 
 portunity for the perpetuation of many serious abuses before the}' can 
 lie checked. It is also true when jjarties have Ijeen.freipientlj' changed 
 that it is difficult to tix on the otticials of one party rather than another 
 the responsiltiiitj- for anj' particular stage of industrial all'airs. Finallj', 
 even in the best managed government, there is danger that there will be 
 a good deal of politics in the selection of administrative officials. " 
 
 R. P. PORTER, on municipal ownership in England, says : "No 
 wonder the tax payers and commercial l)odies of England are up in arms 
 against a scheme for the suppression of fair dealing by the unlimited 
 enlargement of the functions of government. The nearest api)roach to 
 this organization whi'>h we have in the United States, is, at the present 
 moment, advocating the repeal of the wise constitutional provisions in 
 so many state constiutions which limit the creation of debt. RulHed by 
 these wise provisions in their attempt to bring about the British condi- 
 tion of affairs in the United States, the American advocates of munic- 
 ipal trading have discovered that this obstacle must be removed 
 before municipilization of profit-making industry is 'possible. While, 
 therefore, the form the (luestion is taking in the United States is a little 
 different, the object sought to l)e attained is precisely the same. 
 
 " These are some of the specific charges which will be made during 
 the next session of parliament against what the English call municipal 
 trading, but which we exploit under the term municipal ownership. 
 The general charges are equally worth considering, and should start 
 those advocating these schemes for the United States thinking. These 
 charges completely dispose of the four stock arguments of the municipal 
 owuershiji advocates in the United States, which are, as is as well known, 
 (d) that municipalities can borrow more cheaply' than private individuals; 
 [h) that, if a profit can be made out of the general supply of some 
 Commodity for the community, why should not the community realize 
 that profit for itself ; ('•) that the motives of private adventure are self- 
 seeking and sordid, and contrast unfavorably with the disinterestedness 
 of the city aldermen (New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago, for example) ; 
 
 131
 
 (d) that some of these enterprises are in the nature of monopolies, and 
 that it is better that the government should be a monopolist than a 
 private person. To this case of the municipal trader, which I have put 
 in a nut shell, the English opponent of municipal socialism aptly and 
 vigorously replies, sustaining his opinion with an array of data that 
 confounds the college professor and socialistic clergymen who have 
 rushed madly into the municipal ownership arena, and want our cities to 
 absorb alike all the lighting and street railway enterprises." 
 
 E. KIBLEB, member of Ohio Commission, says: "It seems to 
 me that the great barrier to good municipal government in the United 
 States is the almost complete domination of the machinery of municipal 
 government by partisan politics, and the prevalance of that almost crimi- 
 nal idea that citj' government is the legitimate spoils of partj^ politics. 
 The contest has become to be, not which man will best serve the public 
 interests, but, rather, which set of politicinns shall gain the right to 
 distribute the fruits of municipal government among its party zealots. 
 
 " For some reason or other, the people generally have very little of 
 abiding interest in municipal affairs. They find themselves practically 
 unable to participitate in the nomination of candidates for municipal 
 ofiices ; compelled to vote for candidates who represent, merely, party 
 politics, and not, m any sense, the popular choice ; except upon conditions 
 to which they are unwilling to submit, they find themselves unable to 
 obtain official positions, or have their qualifications receive even quasi 
 consideration, and they look upon municipal aifairs in general as the 
 exclusive property' of the politician, as the natural monopoly of partisan 
 politics, and there is a feeling, more or less vague, that there is a moral 
 taint in enlisting in a contest for place. 
 
 ' * Can anybody conceive of a good reason why there should be any 
 party nominations or party candidates for any municipal office, or the 
 pertinence of any inquiry as to the opinions entertained upon subjects 
 of national politics by a candidate for mayor or the city council ? " 
 
 H. L. DOHERTY, says : " One of my political friends once wrote 
 me as follows : 
 
 " ' They (the people) want it, and I am on record as favoring it. I 
 am no longer so sure I am right, but there are other reforms that I know 
 I am right about. Were I to experience a change of heart on this 
 question it would remove all chances of my election, and would elect my 
 opponent, who knows less about this subject than I, and who has but this 
 one plan in mind. 
 
 " ' No matter what my personal views may be, my election will make 
 me their servant.' 
 
 "A majority of them (city officials) already know that municipal 
 ownership is a rank fallacy, but they are too wise to express views 
 contrary to the people they must look to for re-election. By champion- 
 ing these views even though they know them to be wrong, oflfers an 
 easy road to office." 
 
 132
 
 E. W. BLISS saj's : "Under muuicipal owuership and operation 
 the tax payer takes all the risk. If street car patrons are promised lower 
 fares, as a Ijribe for their votes, and cast votes enough to elect a mayor 
 and a council pled<^ed to fix a four cent, a three cent, or even a two cent 
 fare, and the income from the fares fails to pay all costs of ownership and 
 operation, tax paj-ers must pay the loss. From this there is no escape. 
 In l)ut one way can tax paj-ers take security aj^aiust this inevitable 
 catastrophe. They must see to it that the law j^rautiuf? power to the 
 municipality to own and operate street railroads shall provide that they 
 shall be controlled by a scientific system of regulation ; that their 
 accounts shall be kept as prescribed b}- the state, subject to state audit, 
 and shall show the entire and true costs of ownership and operation ; 
 that the council shall not permit any free service, and that it shall not 
 fix a rate of fare less than the true cost of the service, plus the annual 
 reciuirement for a sinking fund to pa}- the bonds issued in behalf of the 
 purchase of the property'. If tax payers do not secure this safeguard for 
 their protection when municipal ownership comes, the losses thej' will be 
 compelled to pay will be a just penalty for their neglect of duty." 
 
 B.. P. PORTER, who has recently returned from England, says : 
 "The advocates of municipal ownership in the United States are 
 threatened with a movement in England, which may knock the under- 
 pinning from their structure and bring down the edifice with a crash. 
 The epidemic of municipfll trading, and interference with private 
 enterprise, may be arrested bj' a petition to parliament for a royal com- 
 mission, or joint committee of parliament, to define the extent to which 
 municipal trading shall be sanctioned bj- the legislature. The contention 
 of a large and iutiueutial body of Englishmen, who have liecome 
 thoroughly alarmed at the present situation, is that individual eft'ort in 
 England is being crushed and enterprise stifled by miinicipal interfer- 
 ence ; that, unless a vigorous opposition is organized against these 
 encroachments of the municipality, the national consciousness will be 
 stifled in the coils of the boa constrictor bureaucracj' as effectualh- as it 
 has been in Germany. The facts in relation to this iiuportaut movement, 
 which was only crystalized a few months ago, will come as a surprise to 
 those in the United Htates who have accepted, without (juestion, the 
 conclusions of enthusiastic writers or half-baked economists in relation 
 to the achievements of municipal trading in England. If onlj' a part of 
 the acts alleged as a basis for parliamentary action and a halt in this 
 tendency to state omnipotence be true, the disillusioning is likel}' to be 
 as complete as it will l)e sudden. The immediate cause for alarm and 
 dissatisfaction on the part of tax payers is the increase of local indebted- 
 ness and taxation since the inauguration of municipal trading." 
 
 J. B. CAHOON says: "Municipalities have not conducted their 
 bookkeeping, so far as their electric lighting plants, or even their water 
 companies are concerned, on a strictly business basis, and have, there- 
 fore, omitted many charges that should have been made against the 
 operation of the plant. For instance, municipal and state taxes in many 
 
 183
 
 instances have been omitted entirely as a charge against the plant. 
 Interest, in some cases that have come to my knowledge, has been 
 omitted even, while few, if any, of the municipal plants charge anything 
 to depreciation, and none of them, so far as I have been able to learn, 
 has charged anything in the year's operating expenses against the 
 provision for the retirement of bonds at maturity. 
 
 "Hence, in reporting the costs of operation, they are invariably 
 reported very much below what the real cost is. Strict business methods 
 must be applied to a municipal plant, just the same as to a private plant, 
 otherwise you simply deceive yourself and place the burden of your 
 mistake iipon the future generation. During some eighteen years' 
 experience in electrical matters, and for many of those years being so 
 situated as to be able to get at the actual cost of operation, my experi- 
 ence tells that nt) municipality, however conscientiously they may try, 
 can operate a plant as cheaply as a private corporation. The factors for 
 economy are not with the municipal plant ; the same incentive to economy 
 is not there. 
 
 " In general, if you would compare the cost of the operation of a 
 plant by a municipality and the operation by i)rivate parties, you must 
 take into consideration these things : First, the cost of the materials 
 consumed ; second, salaries and wages ;. third, miscellaneous general 
 expenses ; fourth, insurance on property ; fifth, employes' liability 
 insurance ; sixth, insurance against accidents to the public ; seventh, 
 municipal taxes, relinquished ; eighth, state taxes, paid or relinquished ; 
 ninth, depreciation, at least five per cent on apparatus ; tenth, provision 
 for retiring bonds at maturity." 
 
 M. A. .GTJNUNDER. secretary Trustees of the Sinking Fund, 
 Columbus, Ohio, upon municipal management, says : '* Some years ago 
 I had occasion to examine into some reports published by the state of 
 Ohio as to the cost of making gas at the state's plant. Figures were 
 published and spread broadcast, which were so low as to cause many a 
 private corporation to squirm. I examined the plant itself, as well as the 
 published reports. The most astonishing thing connected with the whole 
 affair was the admission on the part of the superintendent that, for 
 sometimes six months at a time, no records at all had been kept. The 
 state possessed no station meter, or other meters to speak of, and about 
 everj'thing was guessed at. It was, therefore, no surprise to find the 
 official report showing that the output exceeded the amount of gas made. 
 With revolutions in the political wheel came, also, changes in superin- 
 tendents. One of these complained, rather bitterly, as follows : ' Not- 
 withstanding the fact that I expected to find the works in a bad condition, 
 I certainly did not expect to find them in such a dilapidated state as I 
 did. There were no retorts in the works fit for use ; in fact, about 
 everything had been exhausted, and nothing replaced that could possibly 
 have been avoided ; I suppose, in anticipation of a change in administra- 
 tion. I am satisfied that the expense of making the necessary repairs, 
 and to enlarge sufficiently to meet all demands, would be equally as
 
 much, if not more, tbau to build new works, with capacity to meet 
 all requirements for years.' A further inspection shows that the lowest 
 cost -was reported by the superintendent who had let thin<^8 ^o to ruin, 
 and as soon as the works were in sjood condition, strange to say, the cost 
 rose about 25 per cent. Evidently, no trustworthy invoices were taken." 
 
 ALLEN R. FOOTE. says: "Gentlemen temporarily responsible 
 for the etlicieut manaL,'ement of public i)lants must feel an overwhelming' 
 sense of gratitude for the service rendered them by unscieutitio econo- 
 mists, who, having a theory to prove, never permit statistical accuracy 
 to spoil their story. 
 
 '' The most striking feature is the shown infallibility and the attested 
 remarkable ability of those having charge of municipally owned and 
 operated industries. 
 
 " By means of a system of unfair and unscientific statistical compari- 
 sons, these gentlemen are shown in every instance, in spite of the handi- 
 cap of inexperience, lack of technical knowledge, want of direct personal 
 interest, and the inflexibility of governmental management, to have 
 obtained results which, if true, would at once cause every corporation 
 manager to be consumed with envy. So couTincingly is this proof pre- 
 sented, it can hardly fail to cause these gentlemani}' municipal officials 
 to ask themselves why they have been able to ailmiuister these particu 
 lar public plants so much more efficiently than they have any other 
 pulilic trust ? 
 
 " Whj^ they have managed them so much more efficiently than similar 
 private plants are managed by those who devote their entire time and 
 the best energies of their lives to such management, and have their 
 fortunes invested at the risk of their management ? 
 
 " Why they have been able to manage public business so much more 
 efficiently than they can manage their own private business ? 
 
 " This evidence must cause all persons who have the ability to think 
 analytically to ask why managers possessing such consumate ability are 
 serving the public for little or no pa^'', while corporations are charged 
 "7ith paying enormous salaries for the management of similar industries 
 and politicians are charged with being in business ' for what there is in 
 it for them ?' 
 
 ' ' Politicians and communities who permit themselves to lie guided by 
 such evidence must in due time pay the inevitable penalty for actions 
 based on error. 
 
 '• A shade of doubt is cast over the infallibility of these professors by 
 the admission by one that ' a criticism should therefore be made upon 
 those cities which entered upon municipal electric lighting eight or ten 
 years ago.' Why ? Turn back and examine the literature of this subject 
 written by these same professors eight or ten years ago and you will 
 find that they were as certain then, as they are now, that municipal own- 
 ership and operation was a correct policy, that they were as impatient of 
 delays then as now, and that the very cities they now criticise for adopt- 
 ing this policy then were iyduced to adopt it by their teachings. What 
 
 135
 
 value can an intelligent person place on statistical comparisons which 
 make and repeat the error of comparing a present reported cost with a 
 contract price paid years ago, and ignoring the price at which the con- 
 tract could have been renewed when the public plant was installed. 
 
 " Worse still, what statistical value can attach to an opinion that to 
 compare present public cost with present private selling price is an error. 
 
 " What value can statistical results have, calculated by those who 
 argue that the item of taxes may be omited altogether ? 
 
 " What must be thought of the intelligence of statisticians who claim 
 that "where a city is accumulating a sinking fund, or is paying its debt to 
 this amount annually, no additional provision is required for a deprecia- 
 tion fund? On ha\'iug reckoned depreciation at saj' five per cent as part 
 of the cost in a given year, both interest and depreciation must be reck- 
 oned the next year at only 95 per cent of the value of the plant the 
 year before. 
 
 "A sinking fund is for the purpose of replacing the capital invested, 
 obtained from other sources, with capital obtained from another source. 
 
 "A depreciation is for the purpose of insuring an investment against 
 impairment. 
 
 '■ To represent that a dollar paid into one fund makes the placing of a 
 dollar in the other fund unnecessar3% or that a dollar paid into depreci- 
 ation fund reduces the investment account, is a mistake so simple and 
 glaring it cannot fail to place those responsible for it under the burden 
 of voluntary error. '' 
 
 AN INSOLVENT UTOPIA. 
 
 BY GUILD A. COPELAND. 
 
 It was only two j^ears ago that Mayor Josiah Quincy began in 
 Boston his experiments that were so widely described, at the time, in 
 the American press. He aimed to build up a model city government, 
 ■whose employes should themselves do the work that in other cities is done 
 by contract or through private firms. So Boston was not content merely 
 to have departments for building, cleaning, or repairing streets or water 
 sj^stems or sewers. Its stationery and printing work was turned out by 
 one city bureau. Another bureau was established for carpenter work, 
 repair work of various kinds on the public buildings, and even for elec- 
 trical construction and repair. An ice plant was established for cutting 
 and storing ice to be used in the drinking fountains. Veterinary bureaus 
 were devised to look after the horses used in city work. Of course the 
 horses themselves were bought for the city. Wheelwrights, blacksmiths, 
 painter i and letterers, and a whole army of labor came into the city's 
 employ. 
 
 136
 
 This was, in effect, the nearest approach to the development of the 
 *' muuicipal ownership " idea ever seen iu any American muuicii)ality. 
 It was a modified form of socialism, and at the outset it won hii^ch praise. 
 The city wixs to save the money heretofore paid iu middlemen's or cor- 
 poration's profits, and was not to allow greedy contractors to wring dis- 
 honest profits from the municipal treasury. The painful announcement 
 that the whole scheme is now discredited, and is a sal)ject for popular 
 ridicule, may cause some sorrow among those municipal statesmen else- 
 where who have been so strongly out he side or' " municipal ownership," 
 as a theorj^ which might save American cities from present evils. 
 
 The knowledge of the failure of the schemes for dispensing with the 
 services of greedy corporations or contractors has come rather suddenly 
 upon Boston. An old Boston business man and banker, T. N . Hart, 
 was elected mayor last December, and began his term on New Year's 
 day. Soon afterward he was asked to sign some vouchers for city work, 
 and was struck by the estimates of cost of material and labor. He saw 
 that they were far above the current rates, and he began to make a quiet 
 investigation. The result has been that one after another of these much- 
 heralded and much-lauded city bureaus has been closed up, as hopelessly 
 extravagant. 
 
 From the statement of a skilled workman who held a high place in 
 one of these bureaus, l)iTt was powerless to do much in the way of cor- 
 recting abuses, a lew figures are worth quoting. Reckoning up the cost 
 of material at the current quotations, and the probable cost of labor 
 necessary to do the work under the supervision of any reliable con- 
 tractor or business house in Boston, he found that a job of electrical 
 equipment on the ferry boats operated by the city should have cost 
 $6,800. As a matter of record, it actually cost $10,200. The electrical 
 work on a city building for hospital nurses should have cost $1,328. It 
 really cost $4,754. The work on a city armory shoiild have cost less 
 than $2,600, but the city had to pay nearly $6,700 lor the job. Some 
 work on a public school, estimated as likely to cost $1,471 if done under 
 contract, cost the city about $3,600. 
 
 Meanwhile, investigations were being pushed in other directions. 
 The city's ice plant made an inviting field. After the statisticians had 
 finished figuring on that piiblic spirited enterprise, it was found that the 
 ice used by the water department in the drinking fountains cost about 
 $60 a ton, when it might have been bought from the local ice companies 
 for $2 or $3 a ton. Orders were immediately given to get rid of the ice 
 plant at the best possible terms, lest the outlay thus created might 
 weaken Boston's credit if the plant should be in operation much longer. 
 If a customer could have been found for the municivml printing plant, 
 that, too, might have been unloaded at once. Some investigations into 
 the cost of the operation of the plant indicated that outside parties would 
 have done its work at least twentj'-five per cent below the prices actually 
 charged, and would certainly have done much better work. 
 
 Thus, in one bureau after another, practically the same situation 
 was found. Instead of saving money by doing all kinds of citj' work 
 
 137
 
 directly by city employes, the city has been brought into debt tremend- 
 ously; so that to-day the debt is over four times the limit fixed by the 
 state legislature, the excess having been borrowed xmder special legisla- 
 tive acts. The interest on this debt, with sinking fund payments, now 
 amounts to more tliau the entire amount annually raised by taxation for 
 all city purposes, outside of the school expenditure. 
 
 It is worth notice that amid all these revelations, which have stunned 
 Boston, there is no charge of any such dishonesty as wonld call for legal 
 proceedings. There has been no embezzlement of money. The sums 
 expended are covered by proper vouchers, stored in the municipal 
 records. That there was wasteful and extravagant folly is certain, but 
 the crime is not one covered by the statutes of the commonwealth. The 
 failure of the -experiment Avas due to political interference. 
 
 The reason why it cost anywhere from twenty-five to fifty per cent 
 more for Boston to do its own work than an outside business firm would 
 have charged for that work, is to be found in the fact that the pay rolls 
 of the different bureaus were absolutely loaded down with political 
 appointees. The heads of the bureaus hhd to submit to this for self- 
 evident reasons. The appropriations for their work were fixed by the 
 city council. If an alderman asked to have a friend appointed, and the 
 request was not granted, that aldei-man might cut down the appropria- 
 tion for the bureau so as to cripple it. Hence the request was usually 
 granted. 
 
 Since Mayor Hart came into office he has been compelled to make 
 so many removals in the interest of economy, that it is now estimated 
 that some $500,000 or !*!C00,000 has been saved to the city already. Early 
 in his term, on meeting with the head of the bureau, he suggested that 
 if there were any superflous men in that branch of the service they be re- 
 moved ; but he added that he did not want one man disturbed whose 
 services weie nee Jed. The next day the head of the bureau brought in 
 a report saying that at least one-third of his force could be discharged 
 at once without any harm to the efficiency of the bureau. 
 
 In the municipal printing plant, under the Quincy regime, one of 
 the employes was notoriously unsatisfactory. He was told that his 
 services were not needed and that he could consider himself dismissed. 
 He replied jauntily that even the public printer did not dare discharge 
 him. This impudent reply resulted in his prompt discharge. Yet he 
 came back the next day, and said coolly to his superior: "Alderman 
 Blank of South Boston says I'm to go back to work ; but if you make any 
 kick about it I'm to have your place and you go. See ?" And he did 
 stay, although his work was as unsatisfactory as before. 
 
 It might be supposed that the civil service laws would interpose some 
 obstacle to loading the service down with ,iriefficient men ; but it was 
 found that there were some ways of evading th&civil service laws. If the 
 men had applied for work as skilled workmen or as ordinary employes 
 they would have been compelled to show their fitness ; but many of the 
 applicants were made for service under queer trades, not generally sup- 
 posed to be needed in the city's work.. Often it would happen that the ap- 
 
 138
 
 plication thus put in would be the only one of its kind. The civil 
 service commissioners had, of course, prepared no examination for such 
 a trade. The applicant was registered, and then there would promptly 
 follow a requisition for just such a worker for one of the city depart- 
 ments. 
 
 In a list of about fifty men who were employed in the water depart- 
 ment on clerical work, or in inspectingr hydrants or water pipes, it was 
 found that one had entered as a '' copi)eremith," another as a '' ship- 
 calker," and another as an "expert swimmer.'' There were " sailors," 
 '" dial makers," "rubber gasket makers." ''riggers," and "splicers,'' 
 "miners," "stonecutters," '" beam tenders," "wiremen" and "rod- 
 men " in the list, also, each demanded by special requisition for a man 
 of that trade. About every branch of human effort except that of 
 " expert balloonist " or "skilled animal trainer " may be found in these 
 special reciuisitions ; and the only reason these were overlooked is 
 probably that they did not occur to the fertile brains of the ingenious 
 evaders of the civil service laws. 
 
 As has been said, the different departments Avere so overloaded with 
 employes that the expenses of running them were far greater than would 
 have been the expenses of an ordinary business firm doing the same 
 work but employing far less men. In order to make a show of being 
 self supporting, the departments were obliged to charge for each job 
 much more than it was worth. On paper the departments were self- 
 supporting. Only a few months ago an investigating committee from 
 New York was convinced that the printing plant was financially a suc- 
 cess ; but the charges made by the printing bureau for its work were 
 much higher than the price at which the same work could have been 
 done by private firms. 
 
 What would have been the result if the Boston experiment had been 
 carried out upon a businesslike basis is a question which may be dis- 
 cussed bj' theorists. What actually resulted has been shown. As com- 
 pared with the political conditions in New York. Philadelphia, Chicago, 
 or San Francisco, Boston political methods are popularly supposed to be 
 as pure as the most widely advertised brand of toilet soap. Yet Boston 
 has learned, with mixed emotions of surprise, pain and chagrin, the re- 
 sults of its own experiment in public operation of public business. The 
 question of " municipal ownership " has been settled for Boston.- The 
 proposed Utopia has been forced into insolvency, and a hard-headed 
 Y'^ankee banker is now engaged in winding up its accounts in a prudent 
 manner. 
 
 It may be added that in the mean time those public franchises that 
 have been operated by private capital in Boston are paying good divi- 
 dends : but they are run on business princii)als, and without any inter- 
 ference on the part of politicians. Possibly there is some American 
 city where the Boston experiment could be repeated without political 
 interference ; but I do not profess to know just where that city is to be 
 found. 
 
 139
 
 J. G. BOYD, says: In several instances when the writer was selling 
 and erecting electric light plants throughout the coixntry, he was asked 
 his opinion of the feasibilit}' and desirability of municipal ownership. He 
 seldom had but one reply to make to the query and that was this : " Do 
 you. sir, realize that when j'ou cast your vote for municipal owner- 
 ship that you have, in effect, mortgaged your property by the proposed 
 issue of bonds, from the sale of which is to be derived the funds to cre- 
 ate such an enterprise, by virtue of the fact that you will have to pay 
 interest on those bonds and provide a sinking fund for their final pay- 
 ment ?" Of course many of the voters are not property owners and are 
 disinter-ested in that phase of the question, but usually they are in the 
 minority. We all of us understand how the disciple of municipal own- 
 ership, in his presentation of the so called merits of his scheme, is wont 
 to '"paint the lily and throw a perfume o'er the violet;" he represents 
 to them how municipal ownership will reduce the cost of these commodi- 
 ties, and the undertaking is entered upon with enthusiasm. In the first 
 few j-ears. or during the period of dress parade conditions, the showing 
 and the balance sheet certainlj^ appear attractive : then as extraordinary 
 repairs become necessary, then at once becomes apparent the 'direct 
 restilt of political preferment in the selection of a major domo. and 
 the negative era is entered upon with the advancement of many natural 
 reasons therefor. Here is where the non-property owner commences to 
 pay the fidler for his dance, earned through the ballot box with his bond- 
 voting ballot in his hand, and inasmuch as his income is quite limited, 
 in the end he sufi'ers the most, and the longer the industry is operated 
 the harder he is hit by increased taxes. 
 
 The Electrical World and Enqineer give extracts from Prof. 
 Shepardson's paper on municipal ownership, which shows some exper- 
 iences with municipal plants : 
 
 PROF. G. D. SHEPARDSON, in a paper on municipal ownership, 
 read at the recent convention of the Northwestern Electrical Association, 
 recited some incidents illustrating the incompetent management of some 
 municipal plants. The state of the records kept in some of them is. he 
 said, almost incredible. In several towns there is no complete record 
 of the service connections to the water Avorks and electric plants. In one 
 place, a new superintendent found it necessary to shut off the water to 
 enforce the payment of back water rents. There was no plan, of the 
 water mains or services. He, therefore, was compelled to open the 
 streets and search for the cut-offs, for which purpose the service of a 
 chain gang from the county jail was secured. In another town, when 
 the collector was getting a promise of paj^ment from a merchant, he was 
 requested to bring in the bill for the meter in the barn at the same time. 
 
 The collector held his own council, and discovered a meter with a 
 number of lights, for which no record could be found. In that town, 
 the only account books found were an electric light book with monthly 
 columns for accounts of customers, and an individual account book for 
 water consumers, there being no record of purchases, repairs or any 
 
 1-iO
 
 other expences. In auother place, by a careful caiivass of the towu aud 
 au examination of the Hues, water aud lijifhts were added to the record 
 of about ^UUO income per year, and no one knew how louj^ they had been 
 getting: free service. In another place, where the rates are low aud the 
 water power leaks badly, so that it ia necessary to spend several thous- 
 and dollars at once, the superintendent is confident that the plant is 
 clearing about $800 net profits per month. In another town " there 
 are no records and no system of accounts." 
 
 Closely allied to poor systems of bookkeeping is the incompetency 
 of the city clerk or collector who has charge of records and collectious. 
 They do not iinderstand the business, aud naturally do not make it pay. 
 In one instance the collector knew practicallj^ nothing of the station 
 working, was ignorant of the station output, amouut of coal used for 
 electric part of plant, etc. Owing to iuefHcient aud incompetent officers, 
 all sorts of prices were charged for supplies and work furnished the 
 city. For example, a plumber was paid $2.20 for a valve costing 90 
 cents, and other items in proportion. In another place, the innocent 
 recorder was beguiled into paying a higher price for a new lot of incan- 
 descent lamps, " because they had more watts than the kind formerly 
 used." 
 
 The committees of the town councils are often green hands and of little 
 value in udmiuisteriug municipal plants. In one place a former collector 
 had been found short in his accounts, and a committee was appointed to 
 check his work. After two days upon his books, they made a report on 
 the shortage, which was made good, and the bondsmen were immediately 
 discharged. Soon after, when the water rents came due, a number 
 of people were found to have his receipts for dues which had not been 
 credited on the books, but the man's bondsmen had been released, and 
 the town had a considerable sum to charge to profit aud loss. A com- 
 mittee went over a lot of old Accounts, and found that their predeces- 
 sors had approved reports in which there were serious defects, Ijiat lest 
 they should seem to reflect on the abilities of their friends, the superin- 
 tendent was instructed to call it square, and open a fresh account with 
 each person whose accounts were found faulty in former reports. 
 
 A case recently occurred in a neighboring state, showing how sht)rt- 
 sighted some councils are in regard to franchises. A company applied 
 for a franchise to furnish light and power from a water power not far 
 awaj',' iuteuding to spend about $30,000 in the plant. After dallying 
 aloug for some time, the franchise was grauted by the council, but 
 vetoed by the mayor, who wanted a municipal plant. Although the towu 
 ■was already within $8,000 of its bond limit, it voted bouds in that amount 
 to build a plant, hoping that in some providential way it could put in a 
 plant. In one towu, where a committee of the council was supposed to 
 keep track of matters, a superintendent managed to do away with over a 
 thousand lamp renewals in a single year, of which there is mo account. 
 Over $800 worth of fixtures sold without record were traced. 
 
 The superintendents of municipal plants are often iucompeteut. The 
 superintendent of one plant where they still use GO-volt transformers, 
 
 141
 
 heard of the saving in using large transformers, so he bought one and 
 tried to supply 50 lamps one block distant by a No. 6 wire (assuming 
 one ampere per lamp and 400 feet to the block would give a drop on the 
 line of about 22 volts). The superintendent was sure that No. 6 was 
 large enough, for the insurance rules said it would carrj' it all right. 
 The trouble was, therefore, in the transformer, and he compelled the 
 agent to trade it for three small ones. The large one " did not regu- 
 late" as well as the small ones, and he is sure that the modern idea of 
 large transformers with secondary net works is a mistake and a failure, 
 for he tried it. 
 
 In another town of about 4,000 inhabitants, a technically-trained 
 superintendent is saving about $6,000 annuallj' above the records of his 
 predecessors. In a smaller town, a similar man is saving between two 
 and three thousand dollars annually to the town on account of more 
 skillful management. He increased the revenue by $100 in a single 
 month by using better transformers and lamps, although the station out- 
 put was 10 per cent less. The station output was materially lessened by 
 inspection of the circuits and tying up the lines where they had fallen 
 upon the cross-arms. Incandescent lamps on flat rates taking 58 
 to 70 watts, were replaced by 53-watt lamps with marked economj^. In 
 another station the superintendent confided to an agent that he was 
 bothered about learning the frequency of his alternator. The agent 
 said it was too complicated a matter for him to figure off-hand, but he 
 would calculate it when he returned to his office. The agent found that 
 the practice of his own company in similar cases was to use 125 cycles, 
 and he reported that the superintendent had such frequency. As a 
 matter of fact, it was 140, and the speed was marked on the machine. In 
 one town the chief reason whj" one alderman voted in favor of one sys- 
 tem against a lower bid, was that his preference was the machine with 
 the " kilowatts," while the cheaper machine was a "multipolar" machine, 
 and he preferred kilowatts to multipolars. 
 
 In the laudable endeavor to secure economy, the mayor and council 
 frequently lose at the bung while saving at the spigot. This occurs both 
 in the first purchase of the plant and in its later operation. After 
 one town had voted to put in a lighting plant, the maj^or took a trip 
 to learn what he could. After consulting with several agents and 
 getting propositions from them, he called upon an engineer, who was 
 given to understand his services would be required. After spending 
 some hours pumping him, the mayor left and went home, where he 
 concluded that he was enough of an engineer himself to lay out the 
 plant. So he bought some machines, hired a wireman, and the plant 
 was put in. At another place, a resident bought some second-hand 
 machinery, and after putting it in operation, sold it to the town for 
 what it would cost when new. In a few weeks they had to spend about 
 a hundred dollars for repairing the armature, and then had to buy a new 
 machine. 
 
 At another place they decided to secure a cheap engineer to design 
 their plant. He specified a 20 horse power gasoline engine to operate a 600- 
 
 142
 
 light dynamo, and, in addition, to drive the pumping machinery for the 
 water works. The cotmcil made a contract for the gasoline engine, 
 as specified, including a proviso that if a steam phmt were substituted, 
 the gas engine contractor was to receive a commiseiou of 1") per cent 
 of the cost of the steam plant. It is reported that this was actually done 
 and paid. Two of the larger towns of the state were contemplating 
 municipal ownership, and each secured the services of an inexperi- 
 enced 3'oung man to prepare plans and specifications for the i)laut ; in 
 one case, because he was a friend or relative of one of the committee ; 
 in the other case, probably because he was cheap. The country is 
 full of half-baked electricians who pose as engineers and as advisers to 
 investors. 
 
 There is frequeutl3' an attempt to reduce operating expenses too 
 far. At one place the council discjiarged a good engineer and hired 
 another because he was cheap. Within three daj-s he got his cjiinder 
 full of water and broke the girder of the Corliss engine. It is common 
 even with a privately-owned station, to attempt economy by hiring 
 cheap firemen, since any one can shovel coal or throw wood. But 
 owners fail to recognize that by paying ten to twent\' dollars more 
 for securing a capable fireman, they are ai)t to save his extra wages sev- 
 eral times over in reduced fuel bills. 
 
 In some cases there is great loss on account of downright dishonesty 
 of the superintendent or the council committee. A citj- emploj'ing an 
 honest superintendent with liberal pay and some backing in the coun- 
 cil, will often prevent small and also large steals which are almost 
 invarial)]y found in municipal departments, such as lamp renewals 
 (on which it is difficult to keep accurate account or check), " rake-offs" 
 on purchases for the plant, for which in the end the city pays. 
 One supply company offered a new superintendent as high as 20 per cent 
 on all purchases the year round, as they had alwaj's done so. 
 This is substantiated by old bills. Lamps are checked up once a month 
 while burniuff, and one is often asked to go easy in counting, being 
 offered all sorts of bribes from cigars or drinks to considerable sums 
 in cash. Certain officials are known to have received special conces- 
 sions in this way, amounting to several hundred dollars per year. All 
 this could have been prevented by a proper system of checking, but 
 at best comes down to one man being honest. Carloads of wood 
 have been sold " by the car," by former saperinteudeuts. An investiga- 
 tion bj" an alderman indicated that a loss of over 81,000 per j'ear had been 
 received from that source alone. In another place the city recorder is 
 said to collect the accounts, and sometimes sublets the job to his 
 friends, who knock down about half and turn the balance over to the 
 recorder, who in turn transmits to the treasurer so much of it as suits 
 his convenience, there being no records and no other system. 
 
 The political conditions prevent best results in many plants. Where 
 the employes are appointed by aldermanic inffuence, it is not uncommon 
 for an underling to retort to his superior officer, when corrected 
 for some shortcoming, " Oh, well, I have more pull than you 
 
 143
 
 have, and what are yoii going to do about it?" In one town, until re- 
 cently, the plant was operated by two parties, an engineer, who took 
 care of the station, and a lineman in charge of outside "work. These 
 parties were not on speaking terms, and, of course, each attibuted all 
 trouble with the lights to the other man's part of the plant. This state 
 of affairs continued for several years, during which time the arc system 
 was in bad condition, the lineman attributing it to the dynamo, and the 
 engineer laying it to the lamps. When a change was made, there were 
 two applicants for lineman ; one a good man who would have attended 
 to business, the other was a young son of one of the aldermen, and with 
 little experience or ability. There were also two applicants for fireman ; 
 one a good man, and the other a lazy, goo-d-for-nothing fellow who 
 claimed to have considerable influence in the country, so that he could 
 turn considerable trade to some ©f the stores in which the aldermen 
 were interested. By combining forces, the poorer man was appointed 
 in each case. 
 
 There is a continual struggle between the temperance and the saloon 
 element in most of the towns, and when a new election puts the oppo- 
 sition into power, the superintendent is almost sure to lose his place in 
 favor of some friend of the new management. In one town the super- 
 intendent had found] the station and accounts in very bad shape, and 
 was getting them into fair condition, when the election went "wet." 
 The next day the new mayor informed the superirftendent that he would 
 give him any kind of a recommendation he might ask for. 
 
 JOHN H. PERKINS, superintendent of the water department, 
 Watertown, Mass., in his annual report makes a strong plea for justice 
 to the water commissioners of the town. The department is not paying 
 expenses, and what revenue there is comes from the private consumers. 
 The injustice of this course is objected to by the water board, which 
 points oiTt that it is unfair to make consumers, who do not represent all 
 the owners of property in the town, pay for the fire protection of all the 
 public and private property. If the works Avere operated by a private 
 corporation, the consumers would make such a strong objection to this 
 course that/he town would have to pay for hydrant rental. Objection is 
 also raised to the refusal of the selectmen to pay for water for the town 
 departments. It is claimed that water is supplied to schools, for exam- 
 ple, that it is furnished for general town purposes, and should be paid 
 by the school department just as much as coal or the salaries of the 
 teachers. To compel the portion of the residents who pay rates to bear 
 all this expense is to tax a few for the benefit of all. 
 
 PROF. J, L. LAUGHLIN of the Chicago University, says : "Should 
 the municipalities own such quasi-public institutions ? In answering the 
 question we must always bear in mind the fact that under municipal 
 ownership these properties must be managed on business principles, 
 with great ability and sagacity, for a profit. Is it reasonable to suppose 
 this can and will be done in American municipalities ? And we must 
 
 l-itt
 
 also bear in mind the solemn fact that municipal government is to-day 
 admitedly the one branch of American political experiment in which we 
 have failed. That is unfortunate, but it is a fact which we cnnuot'blink. 
 And it is no help in this disifussion to urge what might take place under 
 ideal conditions — how safe municipal ownership would be under honest 
 aldermen, with a perfect reform of the civil service on the merit sj'stem, 
 and assuming the existence of a vigilant and active public opinion. We 
 must deal with our municipalities as they are, and not as they might be. 
 And in this connection 1 venture to insist — and insist very strongly — 
 that the examples of well-governed municipalities in Europe, like Glas- 
 gow, are, for the re&sons given above, aside from the point. Even 
 though municipal ownership of gas works or street railways by Glasgow 
 might work satisfactorily, that is no reason whatever whj'. for example, 
 a city like C'hicago, composed of entirely different elements, with dif- 
 ferent political standards than those of Glasgow, should follow this exam- 
 ple. I am quite ready to admit that with ideal political conditions a 
 city like Chicago might do things which now would be foolish and 
 unwise. 
 
 EDMUND E. HIGGINS, says : " We would expect that the British 
 tramways, so carefully controlled in the interest of the public, would be 
 paying a larger percentage of their gross receipts into the iniblic treas- 
 ury than the ' hydra-headed monsters ' which our American demagogues 
 are so fond of talking about as ' sucking the life blood of the people.' " 
 
 What are the actual facts ? 
 
 The British tramways are paying into the public treasury less than 
 $600,000 in the form of taxes, or, but 2.4 per cent on gross receipts of 
 $35,u0O,00O, while the street railway's of New York and Massachu- 
 setts are paying yearly if2, 500,000, or, 4.7 per cent on gross receipts 
 of $50,000,000. 
 
 Here is interesting light upon the virtues and vices of rigid munici- 
 pal control of corporate enterprise. If, forty years ago, British munici- 
 palities had said to private capital, " come in and help us make our citie& 
 what they ought to be," the British tramways would to day be earning 
 $;200, 000,000 gross instead of less than $25,000,000, and could be paying 
 as taxes from i8,OuO,000 to $10,000,000 a year into the public treasury, 
 instead of a paltry $000,000. This is not an exaggeration. The figures 
 as stated are an underestimate rather than an overestimate, as is well 
 understood bj' all who have the slightest knowledge of street railway 
 finances and possibilities, in a densely populated country like Great 
 Britain. 
 
 E. W. BURDETT, referring to the wild statements made by an 
 advocate of municipal ownership, says: 
 
 "Another striking illustration of the figures usuallj' given out upon 
 this subject are various articles written by a man who writes articles by 
 the j'ard and uses figures bj' the million. But he is one of that some- 
 what numerous class of persons who know a great deal that is not so. 
 
 145 
 
 (10)
 
 His tables are a comedy of errors, and yet they have been printed widely 
 and have undoubtedly influenced some citj' fathers in favor of municipal 
 lighting." 
 
 PROF. MEYERS of Chicago, saj^s : "It is extremely doubtful if 
 the city has saved any money by operating a plant of its own, and it 
 seems very probable that the expense of operation considerably exceeded 
 the amount paid for hired lamps." 
 
 MR. YERKES, referring to the municipal plant in Chicago, says : 
 "The operation of the electric plant is to-day a disgrace to this com- 
 munity. It is not economical or practicable to operate these industries 
 by the municipality. There can be only one reason why it should be 
 done, and that is to support an army of politicians and their supporters, 
 who, we all know, care little for work, and who are of no service to the 
 industry they pretend to be engaged in." 
 
 A COMMITTEE OF THE NEW YORK LEGISLATURE, after 
 examining many expert witnesses and taking two large volumes of testi- 
 mony, reported as follows : 
 
 " But few have advocated the owncjrship and operation of railroads 
 by the cities. The preponderance of testimony taken and the great 
 majority of opinions expressed before this committee is against the sys- 
 tem so commonly referred to as municipal ownership. It is obvious 
 that, with our present system of municipal government, the ownership 
 and operation of railroads by the cities and municipalities would have a 
 tendency to convert these enterprises into powerful political machines, 
 the result of which would be detrimental to the public welfare." 
 
 DR. ALBERT G. SHAW testified before the committee as follows: 
 " I have never dreamed of advocating municipal ownership in the 
 City of New York. I have never thought of it as a remedy. 
 
 "I do not believe the conclusions derivable from the experience of 
 foreign cities, although I have been interested in them ; but I never 
 believed any experience derived from them of any applicability to our 
 cities." 
 
 The closing paragraph of the committee's report is conclusive : 
 " As an abstract proposition we believe that no government, either 
 national, state, or municipal, should embark in a business that can be as 
 well conducted by private enterprise. 
 
 " The reverse of this proposition carried out to a logical conclusion 
 would put all business enterprises under governmental management and 
 control and leave to no citizen any hope, ambition, or aspiration beyond 
 that of seeking an ofiicial position that affords a meager existence." 
 
 146
 
 EDITORIALS FROM NEARLY ALL THE LEAD- 
 ING JOURNALS IN THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 A MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP EXPERIMENT. 
 
 THE PLAIN DEALER, Cleveland, Ohio, says: Wbat • muni- 
 cipal uwuersbii) ot public utilities" bus iloue for some cities iu the 
 old world bus frequently been approviujjly cited in advocacy of a 
 similar procedure in our own cities. But tbe arfjumeut bas failed 
 to convince persons wbo remember tbat municipal conditions in tbis 
 country differ materially from tbose in most old world cities. Wlmt 
 bas been wanted is an exjierimeut in some lar<^e city under American 
 conditions. If sucb an experiment sbould prove successful, there would 
 be little difficulty in converting tbose wbo are not convinced by tbe 
 Glasgow argument. 
 
 Although tbe fact does not seem to have been generally known else- 
 where, such an experiment has been carried on during tbe last two years 
 in Boston, and its result is instructively described by Mr. Guild A. Cope- 
 laud in tbe current number of Harper's W'ccklif. Tbe title of tbe paper, 
 '■ An Insolvent Utopia," suggests the outcome of tbe elibrt on tbe part of 
 municipal government to do its own work better and cheaper than it can 
 be done by private enterprise. 
 
 When Mayor Josiab (^uincy went into office about two years ago he 
 conceived the idea of building up a model city government, whose em- 
 l)lo3'es should themselves do the work tbat is done in other cities by con- 
 tract or through private firms. In addition to the usual departments for 
 building, cleaning and repairing streets, conducting water systems and 
 sewer systems, a city bureavi was to turn out Boston's municii)al stationery 
 and printing work, and another bureau was estal dished for carpenter 
 Work, repair work of various kinds on tbe public l)uildiugs, and even for 
 electrical construction and repair. An ice pbint was established for 
 cutting and storing ice to be used in the drinking fountains. Veterinary 
 bureaus were devised to look after tbe horses used in city work. Of 
 course, tbe horses themselves were bought for tbe city. Wheelwright*, 
 blacksmiths, painters and letterers, and a wliole army of labor came into 
 tbe city's emi)loj'. It was the nearest approach to a realization of tbe 
 idea of municipal ownership of public utilities yet attempted in tbe 
 United States. Tbe tbeorj- was that tbe city woubl in this way save to 
 tbe tay paj^ers tbe i)rolits of contractors and middlemen. 
 
 Some months ago Mayor C^uiucy gave waj' to Mayor Hart, au old 
 Boston business man and banker. Having to sign some vouchers and 
 estimates for the city work, he was struck by the figures, which were far 
 above current rates. A ipiiet investigation was l)egun, the result of 
 
 147
 
 which was the closing up of one after another of the much-lauded city 
 bureaus as hopelessly extravagant. 
 
 A few items in the discoveries made will illustrate the character of the 
 " economy " of municipal as compared with ordinary business methods. 
 A job of electrical equipment on the ferry boats operated by the 
 city should have cost $6,800. As a matter of record, it actually cost 
 .$10,200. The electrical work on a city building for hospital nurses 
 should have cost ^$1,528. It really cost $4,754. The work on a city 
 armory should have cost less than $2,fi00, but the city had to pay nearly 
 $6,700 for the job. Some work on a public school, estimated as likely to 
 cost $1,471, if done under contract, cost the city about $8,600. The ice 
 used by the water department in the drinking fountains cost $60 a ton, 
 when it might have been bought of the local ice companies for $3 or 
 $3 a ton. 
 
 The result of the "municipal ownership" experiment is an enor- 
 mous increase of the city debt and a severe strain on its financial abil- 
 ities. It is not charged that any embezzlement of the public funds has 
 been committed. Every expenditure is accounted for with proper 
 vouchers. There was wasteful extravagance and gross mismanagement, 
 but no downright dishonesty calling for legal proceedings. The feature 
 of the experiment was due to politics. 
 
 Mr. Copeland says the reason why it cost anywhere from 25 to 50 per 
 cent more for Boston to do its own work than an outside business firm 
 would have charged for that work is to be found in the fact that the pay- 
 rolls of the different bureaus were absolutely loaded down with political 
 appointees. " The heads of the bureaus had to submit to this, for self- 
 evident reasons. The appropriations for their work were fixed by the 
 city council. If an alderman asked to have a friend appointed, and the 
 request were not granted, that alderman might cut down the appropria- 
 tions for the bureau so as to cripple it. Hence the request was usually 
 granted." 
 
 Boston has a civil service system, but it proved to be] of small 
 protection, the ingenuity of the politicians having found various ways of 
 evading the civil service laws. The Boston experiment is an object les- 
 son to other cities where ' ' municipal ownership of public utilities " is 
 under discussion. 
 
 THE NEW YORK TIMES says: "The apostles of municipal 
 ownership in this country have conjured with the names of Glasgow and 
 Nottingham. They have pointed to the shining success of the public 
 mauagement of the business of lighting and transportation in British 
 cities as the full justification of their doctrines. That part of the Ameri- 
 can imblic which puts its trust in the advocates of municipal ownership 
 lias been led to belie pe that the wisdom and soundness of the policy of 
 public operation were solidly established and put beyond dispute by the 
 results of British experience. 
 
 In a letter which we print this morning, Mr. Robert P. Porter 
 exhibits the fruits of British experiments in this branch of state social- 
 
 148
 
 ism in a new and startlincf light. So far from being content with its 
 •workings, our English l)rethren are clamoring for a roj'ul commission 
 to inquire into the subject of "municipal trading," as the municipal 
 ownership of public utilities is called over there, with a view to finding 
 a remedy for the serious and growing evils of a iwlicj' that has i)roved 
 to be profligate for the cities and injurious to the public. 
 
 THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL says : Municipal ownership is 
 an experiment. It has nut vindicated itself conclusively in a single 
 instance in this country. One reason is that no plant is j'et worn out 
 among those called successful. 
 
 New ones start up with promise and we hear of them. What of 
 those abandoned ? Who knows of them ? No two cities are worked on 
 the same plan or under the same or like conditions. It is all experiment. 
 The city of Milwaukee asks Ypsilanti what her lighting costs per lamp 
 per j-ear. The reply is, s87. 
 
 To Scranton, asking the same question, the answer is 838. Gl. To 
 Mobile the sum is given at .iiSo 7l>, while Steubenville is told it is $40. 
 That is, Ypsilanti herself does not know within $20 per lamp what her 
 lights cost. Suppose some city were to ask Milwaukee what the net 
 income of her water works was for the last year ; how many different 
 answers could be given from the reports with ecpial ignorance of the 
 exact truth ? Ypsilanti is but one example — it can be repeated of almost 
 everj' one in the business. 
 
 THE DETROIT EVENING NEWS says: " This is a government 
 of the people, for the people and by the people. It has no place in the 
 field of speculation, transportation or commerce. It has no right to 
 expend money either ior the convenience or advantage of classes that 
 are so small, when compared with the whole body of citizens, that they 
 do nut numerically warrant the expenditure for their advantage. It has 
 no right to engage in business that is outside the sphere of legitimate 
 governmental activity." 
 
 THE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW says : " The constant ele- 
 ment in municipal affairs is the unremitting desire of the politician to 
 gather masses of votes, and of the contractors to place men who furnish 
 them to prey upon the citj' treasurj'. The peojile who do not pay are 
 always ready to create debts against the jieople who must pay. 
 
 "'They who do not paj' the piper are ever ready to dance to his 
 music' " 
 
 THE NEWARK ADVERTISER says: ''It is a part of the plan 
 by which it is proposed that the government should own and operate all 
 public enterprises of its kind, or anj' other. 
 
 "In fact it is only necessary to carry tlie argument a little farther 
 and make the government paternal in every respect, giving it the right 
 to operate all business enterprises, and even to feed the people." 
 
 149
 
 THE TIMES, LOWELL, Mass., says : " If the cities in this com- 
 monwealth should ever p:et control of gas and electric lighting, it is to 
 be hoped they will manage the general illuminating department better 
 than they have some other departments. If thej'' do not, we shall be in 
 semi-darkness half the time. Why not let well enough alone ?" 
 
 THE BOSTON DAILY TRAVELLER says: " We are not aware 
 of any necessity why cities and towns should undertake this form of 
 business any more than others which have always been conducted by 
 private enterprises, and we are not called upon to consider what extra- 
 ordinary power the commonwealth may exercise or may authorize cities 
 and towns to exercise in extraordinary exigencies for the safety of the 
 state or the welfare of the inhabitants. If there be any advantage to the 
 inhabitants in buying and selling coal and wood for fuel at the risk of 
 the community on a large scale, and on what has been called the co-op- 
 erative plan, we are of the opinion that the constitution does not 
 contemplate this as one of the ends for which the government was 
 established, or as a public service for which cities and towns may be 
 authorized to tax their inhabitants." 
 
 THE WEEKLY SENTINEL, LA MARS. Iowa, says: "Many of 
 the people argue that it would be cheaper to make a close and careful 
 bargain with some company. They say that it is better to keep such 
 things out of politics. That a man whose business and living depend 
 upon the successful managment of the works would be more likely to 
 run them well than a committee of the city council, that would be 
 changed every election ; that the owner would devote his whole time to 
 the matter for years, and that officials could only give it a part of their 
 attention. 
 
 " They also argue that public work usually cost more than private 
 work, just as graders working under contract on a railroad move more 
 dirt than men who work by the day to work out their poll tax on city 
 streets or country roads." 
 
 THE JOURNAL, Indianapolis, Ind , says : " The theory of muni- 
 cipal socialism assumes that all public officials are honest and efficient, and 
 where this is the case it works out well, but, as a matter of fact, they 
 usually are not. The city, in operating large public concerns, always pays 
 liberal salaries and wages, but does not get, as a rule, as efficient service 
 as private concerns. There is a continual menace from political influ- 
 ence, where there is a large patronage to distribute, that is likely at any 
 time to cripple the efficiency of the service. Again, if we were to put 
 in an electric plant what assurance have we that the next board would not 
 want to tear it out and put in a better one ? Electrical inventions be- 
 come ancient history in three or four years nowadays. We might put in 
 an expensive plant and find, by the time that we had it paid for, that we 
 had a ' back number' on our hands." 
 
 150
 
 THE AMERICAN COMMONWEALTH says. 'Wiiiitever lul- 
 vantage such annexatiou may have l>ri>u{]rbt, it so increased the o|v 
 poituuities for naisiuauafjemeut ami pluuder that it has enabled Mr. 
 Brj'ce to assert, with all the morecontidence: 'I'here is uo deuyinj^ that 
 the ^overnmeut of cities is the one couspicuous failure of the United 
 States.' " 
 
 THE POLITICAL SCIENCE dUARTERLY says : "Those who 
 
 advocate state uuina^enient in the United States, forjret to think of the 
 havoc that would l)e created 1>3' the simiile political inllueuce of our law- 
 makers. Were the state to run the railways under our political system, 
 the claims upon our lejijislators for spoils would be increased a thous- 
 and fold." 
 
 THE BULLETIN, Providence. R. I,, says: "To add the manufac- 
 ture of jfas and the generation of electricity to duties already beyond 
 the g:ra8p of our city officials would merelj' call more attention to their 
 incapacity. The present test of employing; men who vote the straijjht 
 ticket of either party is a modest one, hardly reciuirin^ the iutellif:i:ence 
 shown by a school fi:irl in selecting a new gown, yet to have so voted 
 for a number of years constitutes a claim on the recognition of the party 
 which is considered imperious. Perhaps it is an instinctive conception 
 of its own limitations that has hitherto encouraged the conservatism of 
 all Rhode Island communities. The camel has a long journey before it, 
 and it is wise to adjust the load to the back which has to bear it; if onr 
 neighbors are experimenting with their caravans, why not rest awhile in 
 order that we may take advantage of their blunders? Those also serve 
 who only stand and wait." 
 
 THE CINCINNATI COMMERCIAL GAZETTE says : "Whether 
 
 the chimerical idea that it is the province of government to do every- 
 thing for everj'body has been i^romoted V)y a superstitious vision of an 
 impossible political and social condition of the world 11 3'ears from now, 
 or whether this idea has received an impetus from some other quarter, 
 there certainly seems to be a more pronounced effort than ever before 
 to impose additional duties upon the government, notwithstanding the 
 fact that all experience proves that government interference with private 
 enterprise is prejudicial to the interests of the public. The proposition 
 appears absurd when carried out to the legitimate result." 
 
 THE ELECTRICAL DOINGS says: "We are all familiar with 
 the devious ways of municipal corporation financiers by which interest 
 or original outlay is charged to one account, superintendence to another, 
 and cost of operation to another. Nothing is harder than to disentangle 
 the various items of a city's expenses and to group them under head- 
 ings which will give a fair comparison with the work done by private 
 corporations in the same Held. Besides, none of these cities has been 
 long enough in the business of electric lighting to be able accurately 
 to ebtimate the cost of renewals and repairs." 
 
 151
 
 THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE says: " So far as things have gone 
 on the city has jiciid t^^'O prices for its electric lights. The work of 
 extension has been far from satisfactory. The aim and intent are to 
 make the city government a paternal one, providing light, heat, power, 
 transportation, electric and telephonic communication, etc., thereby 
 constituting a vast machine with powers far greater than ever wielded 
 by Tammany, and giving opportunity for corruption on the biggest con- 
 ceivable scale." 
 
 THE CHICAGO EVENING JOURNAL says: "But where is 
 the thing to end when once begun ? What reason is there why the city 
 should not go into the business of lighting streets, dwellings and public 
 buildings, and also into the heating of these structures ? Why should 
 not the city furnish transportation over its territory as well as light ? 
 The reason why none of these things should be done by the city is that 
 they can be as well if not better done by individuals or by corporations. 
 
 " So long as municipal government cannot keep the streets in proper 
 condition, it is not worth while for them to extend the field of their in- 
 efficient work." 
 
 THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE says: "According to expert testi- 
 mony, backed with reliable statistics, Chicago's municipal electric light 
 plants cost the people more a lightthan those of any city in the country." 
 
 THE HERALD TIMES of Chicago, says: "Those who advocate 
 municipal ownership of street railways, gas plants and properties of that 
 kind, assume that municipal management will be honest and capable, 
 and that the business will be carried on for the advantage of the public. 
 Thej'^ start out with the hypothesis that if these properties are intrusted 
 'to the municipality, bj" some peculiar dispensation of politics the 
 boodlers will disappear and upright men take charge of all the large and 
 vastly increased interests of the city. One argument we sometimes 
 hear is that if the city owned these franchises there would be no temp- 
 tation to boodlers to break into the city council, as there would be 
 nothing for them to make money out of, and their occupation would be 
 gone. 
 
 ' ' Now, then, say the advocates of municipal ownership, let the city 
 build and own its own street railways, its own gas plants, its own ele- 
 vated roads, and the city council will most surely manage them hon- 
 estly. We would like to know why. Will the vastness of the property 
 so stagger the Coughlins, the Powerses and the Hinky Dinks that their 
 consciences will all of a sudden bloom into sensitiveness ? Or will it only 
 give them a bigger quarry and an enlarged field for their peculiar 
 enterprise ? 
 
 "If there was municipal ownership in Chicago to-day, and the city 
 owned every gas plant and every street railway within its borders, these 
 men and their associate boodlers could dispose of them and defy the citi- 
 zens, just as they have disposed of other property and franchises belong- 
 ing to the city and laughed to scorn the protests of the people." 
 
 152
 
 NEW WORLD of Chicago, says: "There is a gretit deal of 
 force in the arf]jumeut which some of the daily papers have advanced 
 against the municipal ownership of street railroads, gas plants, etc.. in 
 this country. If i.s arrjiud that if the cifi/ voimcUs in thin and other' 
 ritirn are so thoronr/hli/ corrupt that the// cannot be trusted to deal 
 honestly ivith jxrivate corporations in regard to these matters, it is 
 hardli/ to be exjucted that the// ivould deal honestli/ tcith the public, if 
 the// had the management of such enterprises in their own hands. This 
 really goes to the root of the whole matter. So long as the voters of the 
 city see fit to« elect, over and over again, aldermen whom thej' know to 
 be absolutely corrupt, and for sale to the highest ladder, it is hard to 
 see how municipal ownership, or any other kind of ownershii), can pre- 
 vent these men from doing that which they notoriously go to the council 
 for the piirpose of doing." 
 
 THE EVENING NEWS. Toronto, saj-s: "It lias been found in 
 Philadelphia that municipal management of the gas works is a failure. 
 It costs at least 25 per cent more to 8ui)ply gas under civic management 
 than it will when a company takes hold of it, in addition to which there 
 have been innumerable scandals in connection with the service. 
 
 " The opposition of the News to municipal ownership and manage- 
 ment of public franchises has been, all along, on the ground that city 
 business cannot be conducted with the same economy as that of a private 
 corporation, and in the operation of a service of that kind, the waste con- 
 sequent upon loose management is equal to a handsome profit for a 
 company." 
 
 THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE says: "If the works are not leased, 
 the management will probably continue to be as corrupt and generally 
 unsatisfactory as hitherto, and to furnish an ' awful example ' against 
 municipal ownership of such establishments, or against municipal man- 
 agement oi them. Yet, everybodj' knows full well that all the troul)le 
 lies in the fact that the department is controlled, not b}- business princi- 
 ples, but by politics, and not merely local politics, but state politics." 
 
 THE NEW YORK COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER says: "No 
 substitute can be found for private interest, and the hope of profit in 
 stimulating efficient and economical service. Public ownership would 
 waste many times the profit of private owners, besides lowering the 
 quality of service and condemning valuable property to decay by neg- 
 lect. This is true of state as of municipal aflairs. State socialism would 
 inaugurate a reign of waste, inellicieucy and corruption." 
 
 THE ROCHESTER, N. Y., POST-EXPRESS says: -'Not a city 
 in the United States can be named where the business intrusted to it is 
 managed with anything like the skill and economy of a successful i)rivate 
 business. It may be said, as is, in fact, often said, that when gas works 
 and street cars are in the hands of pi-ivate capitalists, the public is merci- 
 lessly robbed to enrich them. Even if the charge be true, is it robbed to 
 the extent that it is under political management ? 
 
 153
 
 THE ELECTRICAL REVIEW says : " If these scientific enthu- 
 siasts could be persuaded to band themselves together and carry out their 
 revolutionary ideas on some Pacific island, they would not only receive 
 ' convincing proof of the impracticability of their political notions, but 
 would spare the United States much annoyance. It has been repeatedly 
 and convincingly demonstrated that private competition can be relied 
 upon to do better and cheaper work than municipal management. One 
 watches with a careful eye every step of the management of its concerns; 
 the other is invariably accompanied, in the long run, by mismanagement 
 and jobbery. What is everybody's business becomes nobody's business, 
 and the poor tax payer always suffers. There is enough corruption, for- 
 sooth, in political affairs in the present scope of governmental functions, 
 without taking dangerous chances on an expansion of the field of opera- 
 tion. The less the state interferes with private aftairs, the better for the 
 public." 
 
 THE BOSTON JOURNAL says: " Whoever has given close atten- 
 tion to the processes of municipal politics and administration, must 
 shrink from adding to the opportunities and inducements to mismanage- 
 ment and personal agrandizement at the public cost. 
 
 ''Under municipal control, the present experienced employes of 
 these companies would be displaced in favor of political ' workers.' The 
 henchmen of the ward boss are comparatively harmless, digging in a 
 trench, but it isn't pleasant to imagine the results if they should be 
 intrusted with the responsibility of running a big gas plant, or let loose 
 among a lot of wires surcharged with electricity. There certainly would 
 be no gain in point of safety if the powerful agencies employed in the 
 lighting of our cities should be turned over to the tender mercies of the 
 small politicians, and experience in most other municipal departments 
 suggests there would be no real gain in cheapness." 
 
 • 
 
 THE COURIER, San Bernardo, Cal., says: "The city, in our 
 opinion, cannot and will not run electric lighting as economically as 
 would a corporation of business men. Every city in the Union that has 
 experimented with furnishing its own electric lighting has made a flat 
 failure of it from an economical standpoint. A municipality cannot, 
 and, in fact, to corroborate our assertion, never is, as careful or econom- 
 ical as a private business association. Politics will interfere. The man- 
 agement, the officials, the employes of the city's electric lighting works 
 would, as a rule, be working petty politicians. They would rarely be 
 faithful. Ward workers are never faithful, except to their bosses, who 
 can give them a grab at the spoils. Let the city buy a plant and furnish 
 its own electric lighting, and it will be a heavy loser financially. One 
 party or another, one interest or another successful at the polls, one set 
 of trustees or another, will make change after change at the heavy 
 expense of the tax payers." 
 
 154
 
 THE DISPATCH, Columbus, Ohio, saj'B: " It would not be good 
 policy, in the jiulfjiiieut of anj' well-informed, prnctical busineBS man, 
 for the city to erect an electric light pUmt. The best statiatics and opin- 
 ions we have on the subject, show that the management of such things 
 costs more under the auspices of a citj* government than by a j)rivate 
 corporation, yet we have full faith in them because of the well-estaMished 
 fact that the cost of managing work under mumcii)al corporations is 
 almost invariably greater than it is under the supervision of private cor- 
 porations. This is largely due to the fact that in municipal corporations 
 men are appointed on account of political, rather than strictly business 
 consideration." 
 
 THE HARTFORD TIMES says : "The work would be no better 
 done than it is now, and i)robtibly not so well done as it is and will be 
 by private enterprise. We might as well say that the government should 
 take possession of all the horse-shoeing work in the country, cut down 
 the prices, and put enough men to work to shoe horses rapidly, so that 
 no one would be required to wait when the ice comes, and the horses 
 need caulking ; and then take possession of the boot and shoe and tailor- 
 ing business, and run the factories. It would be one short step from 
 one thing to another." 
 
 THE EVENING POST of San Francisco, says : "Nothing is 
 more certain than that up to the present time, municipal government 
 all over the United States is a failure. In cities it is one unending fail- 
 ure from Maine to California. There is not a large town in the country 
 that is not infested with bosses. 
 
 Theorists disagree as to the cause of municipal misgovernment, but 
 there is no doubt that a large part of the misgovernment is due to the 
 spoils system." 
 
 THE CINCINNATI TIMES STAR says: "We have had a taste 
 of government ownership right here in Cincinnati for several weeks, 
 and the flavor has not yet gone from our mouths. Our water works have 
 been run by an arm of the government, and have had so. much politics 
 mixed in them that screws have twisted themselves from bolts, and steel 
 eastings have warped until the horrors of a water famine, for several 
 days, stared the people of this city in the face." 
 
 THE GAS LIGHT JOURNAL says: "Their short-sighted mean- 
 ness to their salaried ollicers, intliieiice of ward politicians and news- 
 papers to cut down salaries to the standard of weekly wage-earners, its 
 tendency to keep educated and skilled men out of the profession, has 
 resulted in bad management and great ultimate loss. 
 
 "Headstrong, i^erverse committee men think they know every- 
 thing, and can di8i)euse with ijrofessional advice to a greater extent than 
 the directors of a gas company ever pretended to do. They have a habit 
 of going on tours of inspection of gas works in distant towns, often with- 
 
 155
 
 out their engineer, without having any knowledge of the subject, and of 
 misunderstanding and misrepresenting what is shown or told them con- 
 fidentially, etc." 
 
 THE NASHVILLE AMERICAN says: "According to this idea 
 the government has a perfect right to make soap or to manufacture 
 readj'-made clothing or peanut candy, if they can do it cheaper than 
 private individuals, and, indeed, there is no stopping-place when once 
 the rule is applied. Of course, such an idea as this could not for an 
 instant be entertained by any one but the most pronounced advocate of 
 centralization, and centralization in its worst form." 
 
 THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE says : " A municipal department i^ 
 controlled, not by business principles, but by politics, a synonym of 
 rascality." 
 
 THE PORT HURON TRIBUNE says : " A little local competi- 
 tion would be better than for the citj' to go into the electric lighting 
 business, which might develop several soft places for experimental 
 favorites, for which the dear city would have to foot the bills and the 
 tax payer could stand back and take it out in growling." 
 
 THE NEW YORK TIMES says : ' ' The past week has brought 
 revelations of the most barefaced frauds in the water works department 
 of the city. A conservative estimate gives $500,000 as the sum of which 
 Chicago has been robbed during the last two years. But in addition to 
 direct stealing, there can be no doubt that through lax methods of 
 administering the department, the city loses more than $1,000,000 each 
 year, and that is a low estimate. Onl3' very unsophisticated citizens can 
 be surprised at any degree of corruption, no matter how great its mag- 
 nitude, for the rottenness of the department has long been notorious. 
 The details of the present investigation make manifest the most 
 iTuabashed fraud, and effrontery in the pursuance of criminal methods 
 that indicates long familiarity, coupled with the utmost confidence of 
 escaping punishment. The truth seems to be that each successive crop 
 of thieves rested secure in the certainty of being followed in office by 
 fellows of their own stripe, who would find their profit in imitating 
 scoundrelism instead of exposing it. Under such circumstances no 
 extreme caution was necessary, and events justified their sense of secu- 
 rity for many years, until now, for the first time in a long period, a man 
 possessed both of honesty and business abilitj^ has been placed at the 
 head of the department." 
 
 THE PHILADELPHIA LEDGER says: "The city has hereto- 
 fore suffered, not only from bad gas and profligate management, but from 
 the machinations of a political clique, deriving a large part of its power 
 in municipal politics from the patronage of the gas works. Bad govern- 
 ment in all departments has thus resulted from city management of the 
 gas works. 
 
 156
 
 " To get rid of this venal ami corrupt political machine wouhl l)e to 
 take a lonp: step toward «;oo(l municipal provernment, as it would he to 
 destroj' the strongest and most dauj^eruus of all the political jt)l»lier8' 
 strongholds." 
 
 THE WASHINGTON STAR says: "Not only do the employes 
 of a government of a city, state or nation — do less work, as a rule, than 
 persons in corporation or private employment, but there is a large addi- 
 tional expenditure for superintendence and clerical work. Foremen and 
 assistant foremen are appointed merely to furnish good places for 
 friends. Chief clerks, assistant chiefs and timekeepers in large num- 
 bers are provided with salaries. It often happens that the pay roll calls 
 for more money for these positions than for all the real workers. There 
 are few governments in the United States, from that of the nation down 
 through the states to the small cities, that do not i)ile up expenses in 
 this way. It is true that many excellent citizens are helped along 
 through life by this generous management of public aflfairs, but that fact 
 is, nevertheless, a strong argument against municipal ownership of pub- 
 lic works." 
 
 THE NEW YORK EVENING POST says: "The confessed 
 break-down of the municipal gas sj-stem in Philadelphia is a severe blow 
 to the advocates of municipal ownership. A legislative investigation has 
 finally laid the entire system so bare and defenseless that the business 
 sentiment of the citj"^ is now strong for turning the whole thing over 
 to private companies. It is amusing to read that the only argument 
 made against this course was that of "calling attention to the rate at 
 which gas is. furnished by municipalities in England.' The argument 
 really is, a capable and honest government can run citj* gas works ; 
 therefore an incompetent and corrupt government can do it." 
 
 THE NEW YORK SUN says : " Th^arguments against municipal 
 or county ownership have been stated time and time and again, and it is 
 only necessary to read some of the annual reports issued by various 
 communities owning and operating electric lighting plants to fully con- 
 vince one of the folly of such an umlertaking with our present system of 
 local government. Enterprises or industries such as telephone or tele- 
 graph systems, electric lighting plants and street railway.s, flourish best 
 under purely ec(momical conditions that are unvariably absent from 
 municipal or government management." 
 
 EVENING JOURNAL, Jersey City, says: ' Gas and electricity 
 cannot l)e made absolute monopolies because of the possibility of substi- 
 tution. An individual may use oil or generate his own gas or electricity, 
 but wells can be closed, telephones prohibited ani| street cars limited by 
 ordinance. 
 
 ''The ([uestion that is being agitated by socialists, i)o|)uli8ts. deiua- 
 gogueb and others is, should the cities own the plants which produce 
 
 157
 
 these necessities or conveniences, or should it grant franchises to indi- 
 viduals to supply them ? 
 
 "The water supv)ly of Jersey City, under political management, 
 instead of showing an annual profit, as it would under private manage- 
 ment, shows an annual deficit. The water is supplied at a central point 
 by a private company. The distribution is through public mains, yet 
 the administration of the water department costs more than the water. 
 Similar results would be shown by each of the common services required 
 by a city under existing conditions." 
 
 TRIBUN'E, Chicago, saA'S : "Mr. Sullivan argues that municipal 
 administration in American cities is so extravagant and unbusiness-like 
 that the powers and duties of the municipalities should be reduced 
 rather than increased. It is difficult to answer this objection, which is 
 the strongest that can be advanced. Imagine the street railways of 
 Chicago in the hands of Bobby Burke or Billy Lorimer." 
 
 THE PHILADELPHIA EVENING ITEM says: "But every one 
 knows that so long as the gas works are under municipal control, poli- 
 tics, and not business methods, will mark the management." 
 
 THE NEW YORK COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER says: " For 
 many years the city of Philadelphia has presented a valuable object les- 
 son in municipal ownership of franchises. It has conducted the city gas 
 works by the usual methods that prevail in American cities. That is to 
 say, the works have been part of the city political machine. Under our 
 system they could not be anything else. There has been the usual 
 result of extravagance and inefficiency. Gas has been high and poor, 
 management has been costly, and the plant has deteriorated by neglect." 
 
 THE DAILY EAGLE, Brooklyn, says : "The demand that the 
 gas plant be turned over to the United Gas Improvement Company, to 
 which the common council h%p just yielded, came from many of the best 
 people in the city. Mass meetings were held, and prominent men made 
 speeches declaring that the city had been unable to manage its plant 
 successfully, and that the gas supply was poor and that the business was 
 conducted at a financial loss. The plan has appealed to the common 
 sense of the people. The opposition has come from two sources : The 
 politicians, who have used the patronage of the gas works, did not want 
 to give them up, and academic theorists, who believe that the citj- should 
 own its lighting plants and its transportation plants, did not want Phila- 
 delphia to confess that the experiment of public ownership and operation 
 had been a failure." 
 
 THE TIMES-STAR, Cincinnati, says: " There is a mistaken idea 
 current that Philadelphia found its management of a gas plant profitable. 
 
 "What makes this deficit still more embarrassing, and still more 
 forcible as an argument against the socialistic idea of municipal owner- 
 ship, is the fact that no account is taken of the interest on the invest- 
 
 158
 
 ment, neither is an acconut of the deterioration of the plant taken, two 
 important factors which everj' careful manager of a corporation figures 
 ou at the beginning of his calculations." 
 
 THE LEADER, Cleveland, aays : "A glaring failure of munici- 
 pal ownership. For many years Phihulelphia has tried municipal 
 ownership and operation of her gas works, and now she is sick of it 
 and wants to quit. That is not to be wondered at. 
 
 " Not only has Philadelphia failed to make a profit on the manufac- 
 ture and sale of gas, but the works have actually been operated at a loss, 
 while the ([uality of gas, which costs tweutj' cents a thousand more than 
 in Cleveland, is constantly deteriorating." 
 
 THE TIMES, Richmond, Va., says ; " In the first place it is gen- 
 erally urged that the city can supply the people of Richmond with light 
 at cheaper rates than private companies or individuals are able to do. 
 This statement is not ])orne out by the experience which our people have 
 had with the gas works. Independently of the comparison, which is 
 very naturally instituted in the popular minds, between the rates at 
 which illlumination by gas and electricity, respectively, can be 
 supplied, the comparison being very strongly in favor of electricity, 
 there has been a growing feeling of dissatisfaction with the price at 
 which gas has been furnished. Even if there had been no competition 
 between gas and electricity, it is doubtful whether the people of this 
 city would have been long content to bear the burden of the present 
 city charges for gas. 
 
 "Such has been the principal upshot of municipal control over this 
 question of light. It has been monopoly- which has led to general dis- 
 content. 
 
 " We have ou previous occasions mentioned the general ground of 
 objection to the establishment by the city, of an electric plant of its 
 own ; namely, the interference with the competitive rights of private 
 companies and individuals, the enlargement of the circle of unneces- 
 sary ofhceholders, the diversion of a large amount of public money, 
 which can be expended to more advantage in other public improve- 
 ments, and the imposition upon the people of an additional form of 
 l)aternal government." 
 
 THE ADVERTISER, Portland, Me., say.s : "The reasons are 
 the old ones of incompetency and dishonesty. The works have fallen 
 into the hands of the politicians and the oflicial si)oil8 and the contracts 
 for materials and services have been used ior the i>nrpose8 of the ward 
 leaders and petty politicians until the conditions have become scandalous 
 and intolerable. Nothing better i^erhaps, could be expected (»f a city so 
 ridden by venal politicians and so corrupt politically as Philadelphia, 
 but in New York or Chicago it would be the same. I'ntil the moral 
 level is lifted in the large cities, municipal ownership is inadvisable." 
 
 159
 
 THE DEMOCRAT, Holyoke, Mass., says: "Philadelphia's 
 municipal ^as plant is a rank failure and the mayor is trying to sell it to 
 private parties. He says that the plant cannot be maintained except by 
 increasing the tax rate, while repairs and necessary improvements will 
 cost $5,000,000 in the next three years." 
 
 THE VOLKSBLATT, Cincinnati, says : "Municipal ownership of 
 electric plants. If we recur to this subject, it is done with a view to 
 save the city from impending danger as far as it is in our power to avert 
 it. The danger is great, because municipal ownership has, at first view, 
 much to commend it to the unitiated. 
 
 ' ' But if the saying of the old Roman, ' If two do the same thing, it 
 is not the same thing,' is everywhere applicable, it is of particular force 
 in this instance. Private service and public service are as different from 
 each other as day and night, and it should not be difficult to grasp the 
 distinction. A private corporation is compelled to husband its resources 
 or it will prove a failure. It will therefore not invest more capital or 
 employ more people than is absolutely necessary, and will get full value 
 for each dollar it pays out in wages. 
 
 "It is quite different with a public corporation. The citizens 
 furnish capital in the shape of taxes, and if this money is wasted they 
 are simply bled for more money. In place of an expert, the manage- 
 ment is confided to a politician, whose ignorance alone entails serious 
 loss and damage. His employers are of the same stripe, gutter politi- 
 cians, ignorant and careless, as they are appointed more with a view to 
 their political influence than their ability ; and to crown the misery we 
 have a change of the personnel every few years. If these incompetent 
 people have really acquired some skill and learning, a political revolu- 
 tion sets in, the dorminant power party is hurled from power and a new 
 party is enthroned. Its very first effort is to dismiss all employes and to 
 make room for the healers of its own party. Every reader will at once 
 recognize that we merely state facts which have been experienced in 
 our city." 
 
 THE ELECTRICAL WORLD AND ENGINEER says : "Munic- 
 ipal ownership in Kansas has been quite a craze, but it is the bond- 
 holders now wh,o are doing the crazing, on account of their inability to 
 get back the money invested. A special dispatch from Kansas City of 
 March 29, says : ' The citizens and councilmen of Attica, Kan., met last 
 night and discussed the question whether it woiald be better to arbitrate 
 with the bondholders or to move the town. The town is, and has been 
 for several years, carrying an indebtedness of about $33,000, including 
 old sugar-mill bonds and interest. It was decided that if the matter can 
 not be adjusted for the amount the town is able to pay, the citizens will 
 move their business houses and residences to a piece of ground about a 
 quarter of a mile south of where they now stand. The leading business 
 men are in favor of moving.' The scheme of moving a town to escape 
 indebtedness is not original, Ness City, the county seat of Ness County, 
 
 160
 
 having practically decided on that method of unloading her burden of 
 debt last week. A contractor hasollered to move every building in Ness 
 City to a new site nearly u mile away for half of the city's indebtedness. 
 Half a dozen other Kansas towns are now debating whether it will not 
 be cheaper to move than to pay bonds." 
 
 COMMERCIAL TRIBUNE, Cincinnati, Ohio, says: "'Do you 
 know why the board of city affairs, when it came into office, adopted the 
 contract system for laying water mains ?' asked a city official yesterday. 
 And then, without waiting for an answer, he proceeded : ' I can give 
 the reason in a few words. It was because of the iiadded pay rolls which 
 were prevalent under the system of laying water mains by day labor 
 under the board of iwlmiuistration. The padding was particularly notice- 
 able alwaj'S before an election. For example, in iMarch of that 3'ear the 
 pay roll for the first week showed only 19 men employed, the second 
 week showed 54, the third showed (58, and last week the roll had crept 
 up to 99, and, when the first pay roll of April was brought before the 
 board of administration for approval, the number on the roll was loT. 
 The election was on Ai)ril <!, and the succeeding weeks of the mouth 
 found the roll dwindled to is, and no more. It was to do away with the 
 padding of water-works pay rolls that the board of city affairs estab- 
 lished the system of laying water mains bj' contract. Under that 83's- 
 tem the citizens were given water, and the cost to the public was much 
 less than one-half. It is no wonder that Mr. Mullen, of the board of 
 legislation, wants to see the old system of laying water mains by day 
 labor reintroduced. The padding of pay rolls is a valuable thing to have 
 arcniud the house in an emergency, such as the coming election will 
 prove to that side of the house.' " 
 
 CITY GOVERNMENT says: "The proposition to establish a 
 municipal gas plant in Buffalo has been defeated in the council. While 
 Cltji Government takes neutral grounds in the discussion of the question 
 of municipal ownership, yet in this particular instance it considers the 
 action of the council wise, and justitied bj- local conditions. 
 
 " We argue from different premises, but we reach the same conclu- 
 sion as does the council. Our conviction is that no city now conducting 
 a public plant in an unbusiness-like manner should undertake any other 
 responsibility for fear of making a bad matter worse. At the present 
 writing, Buffalo is the most wasteful city in the United States, if not in 
 the world, in the use of water, having used in 1899 more than 250 gallons 
 per capita per day. This does not mean that the city is cleaner than anj- 
 other, but rather, less business-like. It means that a large amount of 
 money is expended to perform a service which is absolutely useless." 
 
 MUNICIPAL OWXEKSHIP A STEPPING STONE FOR OFFICE. 
 
 PUBLIC POLICY, says: "This country \\\\\ in time learn 
 that they must stand as a unit against every socialistic device to evade 
 laws and fasten upon communities debts for internal improvements 
 
 l<3i 
 
 (11)
 
 ■which taxpayers must pay. Des Moines, Iowa, and Mayor MacYicar 
 have become famous through an attempt to evade the law and saddle a 
 municipal electric lighting plant upon the tax payers of that city. The 
 proceedings of the League of American Municipalities are burdened 
 with long descriptions of what Des Moines had or was going to do in the 
 direction of municipal ownership. In these gatherings of congenial 
 spirits, Mayor Mac Vicar has posed as a brilliant corporation fighter, and 
 as such has received much applause. He is a veteran of two campaigns. 
 
 First, The water works.— Mayor Mac Vicar devoted great energy 
 and cost the citizens of Des Moines much time and money in many ways 
 trying to compel the water works company to sell to the city. Years 
 spent in investigation, in the abuse of corporations and the manufacture 
 of campaign material resulted in an agreement on price between -the 
 company and the council. The matter was then submitted to a vote of 
 the people and voted down. 
 
 " Second. The electric lighting plant.— Mayor MacVicar, with the 
 aid of interested parties who wanted to make money by selling an electric 
 lighting plant to the city, took up the study of electrical central station 
 construction, engineering and operation, and was soon able to give 
 points to the ablest manufacturing, construction, engineering and cen- 
 tral station operators in the country. He demonstrated to a certainty 
 that, with 'a lo.yal council, a competent (or an interested) engineer ' and 
 a Napoleonic mayor, there is no need to learn from experience or to be 
 bound by laws enacted to protect tax payers from being raided with 
 experiments. « 
 
 ''The proudest achievement of Maj^or MacVicar 's public life was 
 the making of a contract with Messrs. McCasky & Holcomb Company, 
 adroitly drawn to evade the law. By the terms of this contract the city 
 agreed to it sue warrants, to levy a tax for the payment of the same, and 
 pledged its future revenue for the payment of the warrants. It was 
 claimed that these wari'ants were to be issued for only the amount that 
 the city had heretofore been paying for lighting and were, therefore, in 
 anticipation of expenses necessarily incurred, and came under the pro- 
 vision of law authorizing the anticipation of future revenues to meet 
 contracts for current expenses, and should not be debarred on account 
 of being in excess of the debt limit. The plant was to cost $105,000. 
 
 "Mr. J. H. Windsor, representing the tax paj'ers, began a suit to 
 cancel the contract as illegal, because unauthorized by vote of the peo- 
 ple and creating a debt beyond the city's constitutional limit of indebt- 
 edness. The case was first tried before Judge Bishop, who sustained 
 the contention of the tax payers and was brutally assaulted by Mayor 
 MacVicar and others for doing it. The supreme court has now affirmed 
 the decision of Judge Bishop in a long c pinion, written by Judge 
 Deemer." 
 
 OPINION OF THE COURT. 
 
 "The court does not think that a contractual obligation, such as 
 made for the ordinary expense of a city (light, water, gas, etc.), exists 
 
 162
 
 here ; the rule cauuot applj- to ubligatiou incurred fur erectiujj a plant 
 to furnish tboee needs of the city. 
 
 " The court believes that the rule adhered to must be correct, for, 
 otherwise, a city, by such contracts as the one in question, luij^ht absorb 
 all its general revenues and leave nothing for expenses ; warrants would 
 then be issued to cover these expenses, and which could be enforced 
 against the city, thus thwarting the very purpose of the constitutional 
 inhibition of debt." 
 
 This decision spoils a chapter in Prof. Bemis' latest book— the 
 would-be secretary and statistician of the League of American Munici- 
 palities -in which he uses this contract to show municipal politicians 
 how the\' can evade the law and obtain municipal plants. 
 
 Maj'or ^lacVicar can now join the partj* ol court repuiliators. He 
 maj- think the people are with him. but the tax paj'ers are not. Who 
 are the people ? 
 
 THE WESTERN ELECTRICIAN says of the Mayor of Des 
 Moines: " Their position would be much stronger were their leaders 
 men of experience and established reputation. Mayor MacVicar of 
 Des Moines, who posed as the special champion of municipal ownership 
 throughout the meeting, and who was chosen i)resident of the organiza- 
 tion, spoke with an air of authority upon this subject, in spite of the 
 fact that there is no municipal plant in Des Moines, and that there is not 
 likely to be one there for some time. Yet Mayor MacVicar will hence- 
 forth be quoted as an authority upon this subject by advocates of 
 municipal ownership, although his address merely repeated the claims 
 of those who were interested in securing the establishment of a city 
 plant in hi§ bailiwick. Under the circumstance^, no business man would 
 be guided in making an investment or determining the policy- of any 
 enterprise he was directing, by views of one so iuexi)erieuced. 
 
 "Public sentiment is frequently misrepresented by office holders, 
 who labor under the impression that they form and direct public opin- 
 ion, whereas they are merely' the creatures of circumstances. Too much 
 importance should not be attached, therefore, to the expressions of 
 local politicians, whether they are clothed in official authority or merely 
 asi)ire to place. 
 
 '" It is admitted even by thote who favor the new idea that many of 
 its most earnest advocates are actuated entirelj* bj" seltish motives. 'I'hey 
 may be influenced by the desire for political advantage or liuancial gain. 
 In any event the tax payer's interests are lost sight of, when such rapa- 
 cious spoilsmen advocate municipal ownership. Honest men hesitate 
 about joining in such a movement." 
 
 163
 
 EDITORIAL COMMENTS REGARDING THE 
 
 AUTHOR. 
 
 M. J. Francisoo lias been known for years as a pioneer in combating 
 the municipal ownership of electric light and railway plants, and the 
 facts and data accumulated in the study of his specialty, have been of 
 great value to all interested in electric lighting. — Electrical Review. 
 
 He is considered an expert in the line of economic investigation. — 
 Rutland Daily Herald. 
 
 He holds no brief for any theory of society or of government, but 
 simply submits the whole question, in a cold-blooded way, to the test of 
 bookkeeping and dollars and cents. —i\'ew York Evening Post. 
 
 He treats the question with especial reference to the experiences of 
 electric lighting, by various towns in the United States. — The Liberty 
 Review, Londou, England. 
 
 His figures will be found difficult to disprove, we think. — Electrical 
 World. 
 
 He has exposed the fallacy of municipal ownership, and his writings 
 have made him an acknowledged authority upon this subject. — Montreal 
 Star. 
 
 He is recognized as an expert in municipal ownership, and his opin- 
 ions are sought after. — Daily News. 
 
 His work is a masterly showing of the fallacy of municicipal owner- 
 ship. — S. G. Parsons, Boston. 
 
 I consider it the ablest argument ever made against municipal own- 
 ership. — Marsden J. Perry, Providence. 
 
 He is author of the able and forcible book entitled, "Municipal 
 Ownership vs. Private Corporations." — Electricity of New York. 
 
 He has made an elaborate investigation of municipal ownership. — 
 Ailing, before Connecticut Legislature. 
 
 In his book can be found many things, which the advocates of 
 municipal control will find difficult to prove untrue. — Modern Light 
 and Meat. 
 
 His speeches are more widely quoted, than those of any man on his 
 side in America. — Passaic Daily News. 
 
 He has made an exhaustive study of municipal ownership. — Post 
 Express, Eochester. 
 
 16J:
 
 He has presented a number of able arguments a2:aiu8t municipal 
 ownership. — Street Rallwatj Jounidl. 
 
 He presents a most formidable array of data, as well a3 mauj- records 
 of municipal plant failures. — Electrical Engineer. 
 
 He is the only man I know of, who has made a thorouj^h study of 
 this (luestion. and has analyzed the results intelligently, basing his con- 
 clusions upon personal examinations.— Burdett, before Massachusetts 
 Legislature. 
 
 He has not onl}' succeeded in collecting a mass of valuable data, but 
 in presenting it has handled his facts in such a forcible and direct 
 manner, as to carry conviction with them. — Electrical Jnduitries. 
 
 He is a noted electrician, and his able article commends itself to the 
 readers of the News. — Saginaw Neius. 
 
 He has recently published a treatise on Municipal Ownership vs. 
 Private Corporations, and has collected with great care the statistics of 
 cities owning their own light plants. — Times-Star, Cincinnati. 
 
 He is an eminent engineer, and has taken great pains to investigate 
 the facts. — Times-Herald, Chicago. 
 
 His figures are accepted in the electrical world as standard. — 
 Journal, Atlanta, Ga. 
 
 His reviews of the questions of municipal ownership cannot be 
 otherwise than interesting, to those who are investigating this tpiestion. 
 — Neius, Savannah, Ga. 
 
 He has personally examined nearly all of the municipal plants in the 
 United States, and is well qualified to write upon the subject.— .4 //<cri- 
 can Eleetrieian. 
 
 At the Cape May convention he read his first paper on municipal 
 ownership, which attracted wide spread attention. He has contributed 
 to many scientific journals, on this and kindred subjects. In 1893 he 
 published a book on municipal ownership, which secured favorable 
 mention from the press of this country and Europe.— A7^;c^/-ic Power., 
 
 M. J. Francisco, a man of wide experience in electrical aflairs, spoke 
 at considerable length in answer to the statements made by those in 
 opposition to the proposed ordinance, giving the local company a ten- 
 year contract. He spoke from the standpoint of a practical man. He 
 took in succession each city plant which had been presented by the 
 other side as an example of cheap light, and demonstrated conclusively 
 that the figures given Avere a mass of inaccuracies, and absolutely value- 
 less. — Argus, Albany, N. Y. 
 
 1G5
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Arc and Incandescent Lights furnished bj* Private and Municipal 
 
 Plants 29 
 
 Address before League of American Municipalities 3 
 
 Average Cost in Private and Public Plants 43 
 
 An Insolvent Utopia 136 
 
 An Economic Truth 45 
 
 All Hope of Success in Detroit Gone 83 
 
 American Commonwealth .* 151 
 
 Advertiser, Portland, Me 159 
 
 Allegheny and New Haven Compared 71 
 
 Adams, Prof. , on City Financering 7 
 
 Argus, Alameda, on Loss by Municipal Ownership 12 
 
 An Advocate of the Plan 57 
 
 Austin's Experience with a Business Enterprise 65 
 
 Ashley's, Prof., Experience in Toronto 128 
 
 Bliss, E. W., Tax payers Take the Risk 132 
 
 Boyd, J. G. , on Increased Taxes , 69 
 
 Boston Daily Traveller 150 
 
 Bulletin, Providence, R.I 151 
 
 Business by Politicians 123 
 
 Boston Journal 154 
 
 Basis of Municipal Ownership 56 
 
 Bryce, Prof. , on American Cities 11 
 
 Boston's Experience with Municipal Ownership 26 
 
 Brophy's, Capt., -Report 26 
 
 Bakewell's, Hon. Thos. V., Report 59 
 
 Bay City Tribune on Local Management 73 
 
 Blirdett, E. W. , on Wild Statements 145 
 
 Cost when True Accounts are Rendered 44 
 
 Comparative Cost of Incandescents 46 
 
 Cost of Incandescent Lights 46 
 
 Cleveland Plain Dealer 147 
 
 Cooley, Judge, on Municipal Ownership 127 
 
 Connor, Hon. Chas. O 10 
 
 Crawford, Robert of Glasgow, on Municipal Ownership in America 13 
 
 Cook, W. W., on Political Free-booters 128 
 
 City Plants Rebuilt..... 18 
 
 Cahoon, J. B., Municipal Ownership from a Business View 133 
 
 Commercial Tribune, Cincinnati, Ohio 161 
 
 "Cincinnati Commercial Gazette 151 
 
 Chicago Tribune 152 
 
 166
 
 Chicago Evening Jouriiftl lo3 
 
 Courier, San Baruftdo 154 
 
 Councilmeu of Logansport, Ind. , Claim There is a Loss 97 
 
 Cincinnati Times Star 155 
 
 City Government 69 101 
 
 Correct Comparison of Lights 43 
 
 Cost of Lights bv Private Companies 35 
 
 Comparative Cost as Shown by Massachusetts Reports 40 
 
 Cost of Lights bj' Municipal. Plants 39 
 
 Depreciation 10 
 
 Doherty's, H. L., Experience 132 
 
 Detroit Evening News 149 
 
 Despatch, Columbus, Ohio 155 
 
 Daily Eagle, Brooklyn 158 
 
 Democrat, Holyoke, Mass 100 
 
 Dillion, Judge, on Perils of Corruption 3, 9 
 
 Detroit's Experience 81, 82 
 
 Detroit Free Press on Municipal Plant 79 
 
 Detroit Tribune on Their White Elephant 79 
 
 Discussion Before City Council at Logansport, Ind 97 
 
 Ex-Mayor Matthews' Report 33 
 
 Exv)erieuce of Municipalities 47 
 
 Ex-Gov. Russell ou Municipal Ownership 127 
 
 Editorial Opinions 147 
 
 Editorial Comments in Reference to the Author 104 
 
 Experts on Depreciation 18 
 
 Electrical Doings 151 
 
 Evening News. Toronto 153 
 
 Electrical Review 154 
 
 Evening Post, San Francisco 1.55 
 
 Evening Journal, Jersey Citj' 157 
 
 Electrical World and Engineer .... 100 
 
 Experience is the Best Teacher 10 
 
 Easton Express on the Municipal Plant 84 
 
 Expert's Report on Negaunee Plant • • 103 
 
 Expert's Report on Petoskey Plant 110 
 
 Expenses Increase at Swantou, Vt 117 
 
 Fitler, Ex-Mayor, on MiHiiiauagement Iq 
 
 Facts Disclosed b}' City Oflicials 50 
 
 Foote's, Alen R,, Views R"j;arding Statements, etc 135 
 
 Few Municipal Plants in O|)position to Private Companies 33 
 
 Financering Plans of Socialists 13 
 
 Gray, Prof., on the Theory 128 
 
 Greenoush, Mr., on Examinations 130 
 
 Germuuder, M. .\., on !\[iiiiicipal Management 134 
 
 Gas Light Journal 155 
 
 Grafton, W. Va., Report 86 
 
 Hewitt, Ex-Mayor, on Partisan Interests 7 
 
 Km
 
 I 
 
 Hopkin's, Pres. , Experience 128 
 
 Hadley, Dr. A. T. , on Management by the Few ... 130 
 
 Herald-Times, Chicago 152 
 
 History of the Petoskey Plant 110 
 
 Hartford Times 155 
 
 Higgins, E. E. , on British Tram ways 145 
 
 Harper's Weekly on Ward Leaders ... 8 
 
 Holyoke's, Mass., Experience 87 
 
 History of Springfield, 111. , Plant 113 
 
 Hornaday, W. D., on iVustin's Municipal Ownership 66 
 
 Interview with a Citizen of Marietta, O 101 
 
 Interview with Citizens of Paducah, Ky 109 
 
 Iron, Ore. , on Negaunee's Plant 106 
 
 Journal, Indianapolis, Ind 150 
 
 Jackson, Wm. , oq Depreciation 21 
 
 Kibler, E. , says, Barrier to Good Government 132 
 
 Ivauffman's Director, Eeports 26 
 
 Lynch, William A. , on Municipal Ownership 51 
 
 Legal Opinions 127 
 
 Low, Hon. Seth, on Municipal Ownership 128 
 
 Loud, Senator, on Public Management 130 
 
 Leader, Cleveland, O 159 
 
 Loss by Municipal Ownership 94 
 
 Laughlin, Prof. J. L., on Quasi Public Institutions 144 
 
 Municipal Ownership Prevents Improvements 51 
 
 Municipal Ownership Increases Taxes 31 
 
 Municipal Plants in Small Places 32 
 
 Municipal Plants Sold or Abandoned 22 
 
 Municipal Ownership a Stepping Stone for Office 161 
 
 Municipal Management 49 
 
 Municipal Ownership in Santa Eosa, Cal 59 
 
 Milwaukee Journal 149 
 
 Municipal Ownership in England Not Satisfactory 133 
 
 Myers, Prof., on Chicago Plant 146 
 
 Municipal Reports as to Cost do Not Agree 32 
 
 Mills, John Stewart, Tells when Trouble Begins 11 
 
 Matthews', Ex-Mayor, Eeport .^. 19, 33 
 
 Mayor of Chicopee on Cost of Lights 58 
 
 Mitchell, John, on Spoils System 128 
 
 Municipal Plant Eecords 65 
 
 Major, Hon. G. G., of Toledo, on the Local Plant 120 
 
 Mayor of Eock Falls, 111., on Depreciation 17 
 
 New York Times 148, 156 
 
 iNorth American Eeview 11, 149 
 
 Newark Advertiser 149 
 
 New Bedford Standard on Middleboro's Experiment 102 
 
 New World, Chicago 153 
 
 Not a Fair Comparison 14 
 
 16S
 
 New York Tribune 153, 15G 
 
 New York Commercial Advertiser 153, 158 
 
 Nashville American 156 
 
 New York Evening Post 157 
 
 New York Sun 157 
 
 Official Opinions 137 
 
 Out of the Frj-ing Pan into the Fire . . 58 
 
 Porter, R. J., on Municipal Ownership in England 131, 1H3 
 
 Perkins', John H., Report 144 
 
 Political Science Quarterl3' 151 
 
 Port Huron Tribune 150 
 
 Philadelphia Ledger 15G 
 
 Philadeli)hia Evening Item 158 
 
 Public Policy on Detroit Business 82 
 
 Purchase of Plants by Municipalities 59 
 
 Peculiar Statement of the Maj'or of Marshalltown 99 
 
 Question of Cost 54 
 
 Quinc3', Maj'or, on Depreciation 18 
 
 Report made to Citj- of Brookline 33 
 
 Rosewater, Prof. . on Municipal Reports 128 
 
 Rochester Post-Express • • 153 
 
 Report of Committee N. Y. Legislature 146 
 
 Ruggles, Ex-Pres., on City Management 48 
 
 Report' of Special Committee of Jamestown, N. Y 95 
 
 Reports of Investigating Committees 32 
 
 Supren e Court of Massachusetts 130 
 
 Sheperdson, Prof. , on ^Municipal Ownership ... 140 
 
 Supreme Court of California 62, 63 
 
 Santa Rosa's Experience 59 
 
 Statement of Mayor of Lansing, Mich 97 
 
 Statements of Citizens of Crawfordsville, Ind 74 
 
 Sale of Apparatus 17 
 
 Shaw's, Dr. Albert, Testimony 146 
 
 Statement of Councilman at Madison, N. J 98 
 
 The Interests of Labor • • 55 
 
 The Basis of Municipal Ownership 56 
 
 Times, Lowell, Mass 150 
 
 Tribune, Chicago 158 
 
 Times-Star, Cincinnati 158 
 
 Tax payer of Jamestown 95 
 
 Times, Richmond, Ya 159 
 
 Table of Municipal Plants 39 
 
 The Way they Evade the State Law 114 
 
 Testimony of Ex President of Toledo.Council 117 
 
 The \Yreck at Austin. Tex 65 
 
 Volksblott, Cincinnati 160 
 
 Very Few Municipal Plants 33 
 
 "Wright, Carroll D., referring to Aldermen 129 
 
 100
 
 Wilde, -Justice, Limitations of Cities Powers 130 
 
 Wisner, E. , on T oledo's Experience 121 
 
 Weekly Sentinel, La Mars, la 150 
 
 Washington Star 157 
 
 Western Electrician 1 68 
 
 Waring, Hon. Charles, on Political Evils (> 
 
 White, Ajidrew D. , on Corruption of Cities !^ 
 
 Walker's, Chief, Estimate 45 
 
 Whitney, Prof., on Loss of Dignity 128 
 
 What do Incandescent Lights Cost ? 57 
 
 Yerkes, Mr., Says is a Disgrace 14(> 
 
 MUNICIPAL PLANTS. 
 
 Austin, Texas 65 
 
 i^tlantic Highlands, N. J. . . . 69 
 
 Atlantic, Iowa TO 
 
 Abingdon, Va 70 
 
 Ames, Iowa TO 
 
 Atkin, Minn TO 
 
 Athens, Ala TO 
 
 Anderson. Ind TO 
 
 Adrain, Mich T 1 
 
 Arlington, Minn 71 
 
 Allegheny, Pa 71 
 
 Aurora, 111 Tl 
 
 Ashtabula, Ohio Tl 
 
 Alexandria, Va Tl 
 
 Alexandria, Minn Tl 
 
 Bellvue, Iowa 72 
 
 Bay City, Mich T2 
 
 Bloomington, 111 72 
 
 Bloomfield, Iowa , 72 
 
 Bethany, Mo 72 
 
 Belmont, Mass T2 
 
 Braintree, Maes T3 
 
 Batavia, N. Y 73 
 
 Bangor, Me 73 
 
 Bowling Green, Ky 73 
 
 Blue Island, 111 73 
 
 Carthage, Ohio 75 
 
 Clyde. Ohio 73 
 
 Columbus, Ind 74 
 
 Catawissa, Pa 74 
 
 Chariton, Iowa 74 
 
 Crawfordsville, Ind 74, 126 
 
 Chicago, 111 75 
 
 ( "onneaut, Ohio 77 
 
 Chambersburg, Pa 77 
 
 Columbia City, Ind 77 
 
 Council Grove, Kan - . 77 
 
 Chicopee, Mass 58, 77 
 
 Decatur, 111 77 
 
 Detroit. Mich 78 
 
 Danvers, Mass 83 
 
 Danville, Va 83 
 
 Dawson, Ga. 84 
 
 Dunkirk, N. Y 84 
 
 Estherville, Iowa 85 
 
 Elberton, Ga 84 
 
 Elgin. Ill 84 
 
 Easton, Pa 84 
 
 Emons, Pa 85 
 
 Fremont, Neb 85 
 
 170
 
 Fayette, Mo 85 
 
 Fairfield, Iowa 85 
 
 Faltou, Mo 85 
 
 Fort Worth, Texas 85 
 
 Fredonia, N. Y 85 
 
 Frederick, Md 8G 
 
 Granville, Ohio 8G 
 
 Grafton, W. Ya 86 
 
 Grandledge. Mich 87 
 
 Greenwich, Ohio 87 
 
 Galveston, Texas 87 
 
 Greenfield, Ind 87 
 
 Griffin, Ga 87 
 
 Goshen, Ind 87 
 
 Grand Eapids, Mich 58 
 
 Holyoke, Mass 87 
 
 Henderson, Minn 89 
 
 Hingham, Mass 89 
 
 Hannibal, Mo 89 
 
 Hudson, Mass 57, 90 
 
 Hull, Mass 90 
 
 Hubbard, Ohio 90 
 
 Hamilton, Ohio 90 
 
 Henderson, Ky 93 
 
 Hamilton, N. Y 93 
 
 Higginsville, Mo 93 
 
 Herington, Kan 93 
 
 Holland, Mich 93 
 
 Herkimer, N. Y 93 
 
 Hight Point, N. C 53 
 
 Huntington, Ind 93 
 
 Indianola, Iowa 93 
 
 Jacksonville, Fla 94 
 
 Johnson, Vt 94 
 
 Jackson, Ohio 94 
 
 Jacksonville, 111 94 
 
 Jamestown, N. Y* 94 
 
 Kalamazoo, Mich 90 
 
 Kendallsville. Ind 96 
 
 Lowell, Mich 96 
 
 Lisbon, Iowa 96 
 
 Leon, Iowa 96 
 
 Logansport, Ind 96 
 
 Lewiston, Me 97 
 
 Lansing, Mich 97 
 
 Lyons, Iowa 97 
 
 Miamisburg, Ohio 98 
 
 Marseilles, 111 98 
 
 Martinsville, Ind 98 
 
 Montpelier, Ohio 98 
 
 Mattoon, 111 98 
 
 Madison, N. J 98 
 
 Mishawaka, Ind 99 
 
 Muncie, Ind 99 
 
 Meadville, Pa 99 
 
 Marshalltown, Iowa 99 
 
 Macon, Mo 100 
 
 Marietta, Ohio 100 
 
 Martins Ferry, Ohio 101 
 
 Marshall, Mich 101 
 
 Mt. Pleasant, Iowa 101 
 
 Mazomanie, Wis 101 
 
 Marblehead, Mass 101 
 
 Middleboro, Mass 101 
 
 Madisonville, Ohio 102 
 
 Marion, Ind 102 
 
 Morgan Park, 111 102 
 
 Marquette, Mich 102 
 
 Morrisville, Yt 102 
 
 North East, Pa 103 
 
 Negaiinee, Mich 103 
 
 Northfield, Vt 107 
 
 Newbury, S. C 107 
 
 Needham, Mass 108 
 
 North Attleboro, Mass 108 
 
 Ortonville, Minn 108 
 
 Ovid, Mich 108 
 
 Osage City, Kan 108 
 
 Oxford, Ohio 108 
 
 Painsville, Ohio 108 
 
 Paducah, Ky 109 
 
 Paris, 111 109 
 
 Paw Paw, Mich 109 
 
 Plain City, Ohio 109 
 
 Pawnee City, Neb ' 109 
 
 Peabody, Mass 109 
 
 Petoskey, Mich 110 
 
 Portland, Mich 108 
 
 Quitman, Ga Ill 
 
 Quakertowu, Pa Ill 
 
 Rock Falls. Ill Ill 
 
 Rochelle, 111 112 
 
 Reading, Mass 112 
 
 Rensselaer, Ind 112 
 
 Rushville, Ind 112 
 
 St. Charles, 111 112 
 
 171
 
 St. Clair, Pa 112 
 
 South Boston, Va 112 
 
 Salem, Va 112 
 
 St. Peter, Minn 113 
 
 Sherman, Texas .. 113 
 
 Springville, N. Y 113 
 
 Stuart, Iowa 113 
 
 Shelby, Ohio 113 
 
 Statesville, N. C 113 
 
 Santa Cruz, Cal 113 
 
 Springfield, 111 113 
 
 Somerville, Tenn 115 
 
 St. Charles, Mo 115 
 
 South Norwalk, Conn 115 
 
 Stanton, 111 116 
 
 Smyrna, Del 116 
 
 Shelby, Mich IIG 
 
 Shaftsbury, Penn 116 
 
 Shickshinny, Pa 116 
 
 Santa Clara, Cal 116 
 
 St. Joseph, Mo 117 
 
 Swanton, Vt 117 
 
 Salem, 111 117 
 
 Toledo, Ohio 117 
 
 Taunton, Mass 124 
 
 Titusville, Pa 124 
 
 Topeka, Kan 124 
 
 Tarentum, Pa 124 
 
 Vinton, la...... 125 
 
 Wheeling, W. Va 125 
 
 Westfield, N. Y 125 
 
 Waseca, Minn 125 
 
 Wakefield, Mass 125 
 
 Wellston, Ohio 125 
 
 Wells River, Vt 125 
 
 Wiuterset, la 126 
 
 Watervliet, N. Y 126 
 
 Wilmington, Ohio 126 
 
 Wa))akoneta, Ohio 126 
 
 Ypsilanti, Mich 126 
 
 172
 
 4 II i 'I. il ,1
 
 UMlUiJl'lU V 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 JUN 
 
 jtCO LOURII 
 
 SEC'tiicimt' 
 
 ^i NOV 20 1975 
 141975 
 
 Form L9-Series 4939
 
 3 1158 00734 3295 
 
 HD 
 F847m 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 001 253 957 3