THE MAYOR'S CONTENTIONS,

Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14546, 24 December 1912, Page 10

THE MAYOR'S CONTENTIONS,

fR J. L. SCOTT REPLIES. i —- Thi> Lake 'Coleridge scheme was again discussed by Mr J. L. Scott, who replied to tho Mayor's contentions on the ajubject, in an interview yesterday with a "Press" reporter. '"I see by this morning's paper," said ;Mr Scott, "that the Mayor impugns the figures I used with reference to the Coventry Munic-pai <-oipo.at.on charge for eketne current. His source of in;orniatio!i was the Municipal Year Book. Such sources, as we all know, aro far from mfal.ible. As it i got aiAiyi direct from the Coventry E.cctr.cal Department, and I had it ooiToburated at ihe various cn o iucering woiks wii.cn 1 ViS.ttd, us, for instance, tho i>uimler Company, tub Britannial<bunury Company, tile Kover Company, and tne large engineering works of A.ireu He.bv.ru anci Company, ail of wlioin are taking current at tuo price 1 quoted. But in order to iiutiier tubotant.ate my figure, and to show tlio inuacy of thoae oy tue Municipal lear Book, i append an extinct from the 'Eiectr.CLil T.mes,' which was broug.it uadoi- my notice by Mr lough, the engineer of the Coventry instailat.on:—

" 'Within the past few years the Coventry electric supply undertaking has been raised to a posit.on of eminence in the electric supply industry. The- business lias dtveioped with remarkable- activity, the working costs have been reduced to figures of striking merit, while the annual profits, notwithstanding low charges, have risen to sums of considerable value. These dcire.opments are directly duo to the publ c-spirited policy of the Electric Lighting Committee in promoting tho power supply business, the wisdom of which has never been more forcibly demonstrated. Of last year's total output of ten and a half million units, no less than nine-tenths was supplied for power purposes at an average selling price ot .87 d per unit; yet, thanks to the high standard of economical work.ng which has been attained, the business yielded a gross profit at tho high rate of 12.60 per cent, on tho capital employed, and a net surplus, after allowing for the capital charges, of £15,936. These resu.ts are of such conspicuous excellence that no expression of commendation need be applied to them. , "

A summary of the comparative records of the undertaking lor the past two years is set forth in tabular form, and the paper goes on to say:— " A notab.e feature of the records of the Coventry undertaking ha* been its low working costs, and the regularity with which they have been reduced year by year. Last year's operations were started with the total working costs at .38:1 per unit. They now stand at .33d per unit, despite the adversities which were encountered during the coal and railway labour troubles. Such an attainment dees iniinito credit to the administration.' " For ready comparison a list is appended of the lowest working costs at present figuring in the paper's tables, and it is added: — " 'The Coventry undertaking easily the second place, its figure of .33d per unit being cxc 11 d only by tho .30d per unit of tho joint undertak ng which serves the Stalybridge and Hyde district. In considering the two figures, tho fet should not be overlooked that the Sta.ybridge undertaking has a substantial traction load, whereas tho Coventry undertaking has no such class of supply, and that the load-factor conditions greatly favour the Stalybridjp works.' "\ou will notice," continued Mr Scott, "that the cost of current at Coventry is .33d or one-third of a penny per unit. I have somewhere, the complete details of the items which go to make up this cost, and which cover everything that can bo possibly charged eg'inst it. The extract which I quote goes to show that the Stalybridge and Hyde undertaking goes ono better than Coventry. I visited Luton in the course of my travels. There the charge for current is lower than at Coventry, while the charge made to consumers at the groat engineering exhibition at Olympia was even lower still. The Mayor says that

after all, I merely express an opinion, and that it would have been better if I had supplied figures on which I bused my calculation. The obvious reply to this is that the proposed rates at ChVi&tchurch are based on estimates, and if these estimates in turn are basod on figures no more reliable than those quoted from tho Municipal Year Beck, they cannot have any authoritative value. If the Council wants a report from mc, and is prepared to pay for it, I give them one brsed on facts and figures, gathered at first hand, and not from such dub'ous ?ourcrs as the Municipal Year Book. But then the figures on wh'ch any proposed rates in Christchurch aro based can only be in the form of an est : mate. It will be an interesting study, and a very great pleasure for mc, at some future time, to go over the details of these estimates and compare them not only with each other, but with the information which I now have at my dispos.il. At p-esort I am concerned only in show'ng that the figu-es I gave, aJid which have ben impugned, are absolutely correct."