GAS LIGHT ASSOCIATIONS.
TIE observations in the SPECTATOR of the 30th ult., on a pamphlet by Mr. W. Matthews, entitled a " Letter to the Lord Mayor," have called forth the ire of that gentleman in no measured terms, in a recent communication to one of the Morning Papers. We shall not follow the example of Mr. Matthews by exhibiting any hostile feeling on the subject ; for we beg to assure him that the public interest alone formed the basis on which we undertook any discussion of the question, otherwise his Letter to the Lord Mayor would never have excited our notice.
The proper mode of considering the question is to simplify it as much as possible between the real parties at issue—the public consumer, and the coal- gas manufacturer; for we have no curiosity to pry into the motives which may have induced Mr. Matthews to undertake the defence of these gas-light or water associations. We therefore merely repeat the inquiry,—whether the public might not be supplied with coal gas, equal in quality to that usually supplied in the metropolis, at from twenty to thirty per cent. below the pre- sent prices, provided no monopoly of districts existed ? We shall endeavour to prove the affirmative of this proposition, we hope beyond all contradiction, to every unprejudiced reader. But we must iu the first place reply to a few of the remarks of our irritable opponent.
Because we had not the good fortune to adopt the same view of the mat- ter between the public and the gas companies that Mr. Matthews has taken. that gentleman very kindly charges us with " illiberality," and ignorance of "elementary knowleg,e" of the subject. Could it be necessary, in a merely popular article, to inform our readers that coal gas is a compound of hy- drogen and carbon ; or that its illuminating power is in proportion to its spe- cific gravity ; or any other elementary truisms respecting gas-lights ? In arguing a question of civil economy in which the public are so deeply inte- rested as the supply of gas-light or water,- we have no wish to indulge in verbal quibbling, which seems the chief weapon of Mr. Matthews ; but when that gentleman tells us that the " earlier gas companies were actually obliged by Act of Parliament to furnish a better light and at a lower price than could be furnished in the usual manner," we would ask him, who solicited these imperative and oppressive acts of Parliament ? Could the Legislature have compelled any body of men, without their own consent, to undertake con- tracts by which they would sustain a loss ? We therefore repeat our former assertion—which can be verified by hun- dreds of individuals, and by the parish authoritiesof St. James's, SeGeorge's, and Marylebone—that the chartered Gas Company offered voluntarily to light the public lamps even at a loss, in order to repay themselves by charging extra- vagantly for private lights. With the profit derived from the several provin- cial coal gas establishments we have:nothing to do. Our question was simply, whether the inhabitants of the cities of Londonand Westminster were not paying considerably higher for the accommodation of gas-light in shops and the interior of houses, than if the supply were open to fair competition ? And the very best evidence that can be given is, that one of the Gas Com- panies at the north-east portion of the City has actually offered to supply the parish of Bishopsgate with an equal degree of illumination at a price twenty-five per cent. lower than is charged by the chartered company ; while another company, now forming at the opposite end of the metropolis, engages to light the north-west district at a reduction of at least ten per cent. If this be not proof of the accuracy of our assertion, we know not what is proof.
Mr. Matthews thinks he has convicted us of an egregious error in calling the Report on Gas-lighting drawn up by the late Sir William Congreve by order of the Secretary of State, a Parliamentary Report on the Oil Gas Bill. To such trifling cavilling we offer no reply. The two reports of Sir William contained the most authentic evidence that could be procured, both from the superintendents and from the books of the several gas-works of the metropolis, as to the price at which coal-gas could be manufactured on the large scale. From which it appears, that the several gas companies differed very consi- derably in their expenditure ; the cost of manufacture, according to their statements, varying from 4s. 5d. to 6s. id. per 1,000 feet.
11r. Matthews may perhaps be justified in not placing the fullest reliance on the estimates in these reports, from a knowledge of the fact that the Gas Companies were extremely jealous of admitting Sir William Congreve to ex- amine their works and question their servants as to the detailg of the process and the cost of manufacture ; a very common thing in many other concerns besides gas establishments, with the view of concealing the actual amount of profit arising from any new or peculiar species of manufacture.
But whatever objection may be raised against the testimony of Sir William Congreve, we should apprehend Mrs Matthews will not doubt the authority of " Peckston on Gas-lights," considering how copiously he has borrowed from this author in his late familiar work "on Gas-lighting."
Now as Mr. Matthews challenges us to point out any authentic document which hears out our former assertion that' he best coal is capable of yielding from twelve to fourteen thousand feet of gas per chaldron, we beg leave to refer him to page 169 of a work, to which he owes such obligations in the book-making way, for the following words : "On the average mode of working, we may consider that five such (oval) retorts will in twenty-four hours carbonize one chaldron, or twenty-seven hundred weight of coals, and produce from twelve to fourteen thousand cubic feet of gas ;" and at page 171 a table is given of the product of one week, a seven days' carbonization, which gives an average of 14,000 cubic feet per chaldron. And we could mention many instances in which 15,000 feet of gas have been obtained from one chal- dron of coals, did we feel the slightest interest in pursuing the controversy with Mr. Matthews, beyond that of preventing the public from being deluded by mis- representations and imposed on by monopolists: But if the coal-gas compa- nies, with the view of saving five or six shillings per chaldron, choose to em- ploy coal of inferior quality, which will not yield more than ten thousand feet per chaldron, that is their own affair. From the quantity of sulphuretted hydrogen, carbonic acid, and carbonic oxide given out by the inferior kinds of coal, there is also a considerable reduction of volume by the gas passing through the purifiers. But if the manufacturer will not employ the best ma- terials, he has no right to charge the public with the deficiency in the pro- duct ; while he diminishes his current expenses in the expenditure of the raw material. From the " printed authorities," therefore, of a writer whom Mr. Matthews must esteem, we feel fully justified in estimating the average quantity of purified gas obtained from the purifiers of the respective London coal gas establishments at not less than 12,000feet per chaldron.
It is moreover evident, from a comparison of the estimated expense of ma- nufacture by Accum, Sir William Congreve, and Peckston, that the cost of manufacture never ought to exceed 54s. or 55s. per chaldron for the coals
carbonized. Consecluentlya if we allow az a fair average 60 to 62 ehillitiga
for the manufacture, including coals, and every expense even to the lamp- lighter of the gas works, we should have 12,000 for 31., or about the rate of 5 shillings per every 1000 cubic feet. Mr. Peckston estimates the price at 5s. 3d. to 5s. 6d. per 1000 feet ; and that after every incidental expense is allowed for, there remains a profit of 10 per cent., within a fraction, for the interest of the capital invested. How then does this statement bear out the assertion of Mr. Matthews, "that the present coal gas companies only make six per cent. on their capital" ?
It is not always pclitic, as we. see in the proceedings of other joint stock associations, (for example, the Bank of England) to make a dividend of pro- fits beyond a certain amount. It is the safest course, in every corporate body, to preserve a considerable fund fir contingencies, both for conducting the concern with becoming dignity, and for giving appropriate appendages to the managers and directors. Whether this may be the case with the principal gas companies of the metropolis, we have no means of knowing. But we think, that in cases where the Legislature have passed Acts of Par- liament allowing exclusive advantages to great capitalists, some provision ought to have been made for auditing the accounts of such incorporated companies, to prevent their deriving exorbitant profits in the supply of a commodity of the first necessity, and from the manufacture of which there cannot be the smallest risk common to other manufactures, such as that of over-production, or want of demand ; and more especially in a case where by the monopoly of districts by the management of the respective parties,.
there can be no appeal against imposition. a.
Previous page
