352.5 
 
STREET LIGHTING 
 
 IN ST. LOUIS 
 
 REP 
 
 O R T 
 
 OF THE 
 
 LIGHTING COMMITTEE 
 
 
 OF 
 
 
 THE 
 
 CIVIC 
 
 LEAGUE 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 0 8 
 
 THE CIVIC LEAGUE OF ST. LOUIS 
 
 ST. LOUIS, MO. 
 
Junction of Lindell Boulevard and McPherson Avenue, St. Louis. 
 
^60 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 3 
 
 So^.^5 
 
 \C\ 
 
 Statement of the Executive Board 
 
 To the Citizens of St. Louis : — 
 
 More than a year ago the Executive Board of the Civic League 
 appointed a committee “to investigate and report upon the most de- 
 sirable and economical form and method of lighting the streets and 
 alleys of the city.” 
 
 We were fortunate in securing for service on that committee men 
 who were well equipped both by experience and training to furnish 
 the most reliable recommendations for the proper solution of this 
 question. They were J. L. Van Ornum, Chairman, Professor and Head 
 of the Civil Engineering Department, Washington University; E. L. 
 Adreon, Vice-President and General Manager of the American Brake 
 Company, who for eight years served as Comptroller of the city; Joseph 
 D. Bascom, of the firm of Broderick & Bascom Rope Company; Tres- 
 cott F. Chaplin, attorney; John J. Lichter, mechanical engineer; A. S. 
 Langsdorf, Professor and Head of the Electrical Engineering Depart- 
 ment, Washington University. This committee is equipped to pass judg- 
 ment, not only upon the engineering problems involved, but also upon 
 the financial and legal points at issue. 
 
 The committee has studied the question from every point of view 
 and its conclusions are expressed in the accompanying report, which 
 we heartily approve and submit to the people of St. Louis for their 
 information. 
 
 The committee deserves the commendation of the entire city for 
 the time and labor given freely to this careful and scientific analysis 
 of the lighting problem. 
 
 EXECUTIVE BOARD. 
 
 Mayo Fesler, Secretary. H. 
 
 T. S. McPtieeters 
 N. A. McMillan 
 Edward C. Eliot 
 Geo. C. Hitchcock 
 J. H. Gundlach 
 Dr. M. B. Clopton 
 Geo. D. Markham 
 
 N. Davis, President 
 J. L. Hornsby 
 B. J. Taussig 
 Henry T. Kent 
 J. Lawrence Mauran 
 Chas. Rebstock 
 Chas. A. Stix 
 Francis A. Drew 
 
 May, 1908. 
 
4 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 Statement of the Lighting Committee 
 
 To the Executive Board of the Civic League: 
 
 Gentlemen: — Your committee to whom was referred the question 
 of street lighting in St. Louis, with the request that we investigate 
 and report upon the most desirable and economical form and method 
 of lighting, begs leave to submit the following report, containing the 
 conclusions which have the unanimous approval of the committee. 
 
 During the investigation, begun more than a year ago, we have 
 consulted all of the literature available on the subject, including the 
 lighting reports from the various cities, government reports, discussions 
 on the question of municipal ownership, magazine articles, and the 
 exhaustive report of the National Civic Federation on the “Municipal 
 and Private Operation of Public Utilities,” which contains the most 
 recent data on municipal lighting plants in American and English 
 cities. We framed a list of questions which were sent to the Supervisor 
 of Lighting in each of the first twenty cities in the United States, re- 
 questing accurate and detailed information on practically every phase 
 of the problem. We have carefully reviewed the history of street 
 lighting in St. Louis and as far as possible examined the facts relative 
 to the rights of existing corporations and the laws, both state and 
 municipal, controlling them. 
 
 From these sources your committee has drawn its conclusions, which 
 are here set forth in detail, and also summarized in the brief state- 
 ment in the opening pages. 
 
 We submit this report with the hope that it will assist in some 
 measure at least, in solving the lighting question in St. Louis far 
 enough in advance of the expiration of the present contracts as to 
 enable the city to secure for the future the best form and method of 
 lighting and at a minimum cost. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 LIGHTING COMMITTEE, 
 
 J. L. Van Ornum, Chairman. Teescott F. Chaplin 
 
 E. L. Adreon A. S. Langsdorf 
 
 Joseph D. Bascom John J. Lighter 
 
Central Avenue, Rio de Janiero — A Suggestion for the Lighting of Twelfth Street. 
 
6 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 Summary of Conclusions 
 
 I. The present contracts for street lighting expire August 31, 1910. 
 
 II. Definite arrangements for the lighting of the streets should be made 
 far enough in advance of that date to secure the best system of 
 lighting and insure the best terms to the city. 
 
 III. The committee believes that for the present at least the residential 
 section of the city should be lighted by gas and the business section 
 by electricity. 
 
 IV. The present cost of electricity of $97.50 per arc lamp per year and 
 $19.65 per incandescent lamp per year, and of gas at approximately 
 $27.00 per mantle lamp per year, is unreasonably high and should be 
 materially reduced. 
 
 V. Three possible ways of securing a reduction in the cost of electricity. 
 
 A. By constructing a municipal plant. 
 
 B. By encouraging competition. 
 
 C. By regulating and controlling prices. 
 
 ?- 
 
 A. A Municipal Plant: 
 
 1. The total cost of operating a municipal plant, if operated 
 in a business like manner, would be approximately 2 y 2 
 cents per kilowatt hour, or about $69.00 per arc lamp per 
 year, and about $17.00 per incandescent lamp per year. 
 
 2. But the danger of partisan politics in the management 
 and operation of the plant, which tends to reduce its 
 efficiency and increase its cost, indicates the inadvisability 
 of municipal ownership except as a last resort. 
 
 3. Municipal ownership in the place of public franchise 
 grants merely transfers the danger of political mismanage- 
 ment from the legislative body, which grants the franchise, 
 to the administrative officials appointed by the legislative 
 body to operate the plant. 
 
 4. The economy of municipal operation and control has not 
 yet been proven in this country — only two of the first ten 
 cities, Chicago and Detroit, have attempted it. The ex- 
 perience of these two cities is not such as to warrant the 
 statement that a municipal plant would be more economical 
 than contract lighting. 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 7 
 
 5. In the opinion of the Committee the conditions at the 
 present time are unfavorable for the construction and 
 operation of a municipal electric lighting plant for the 
 lighting of the streets of the city; and it believes this 
 function should not be undertaken by the municipality if 
 reasonable rates and efficient service can be secured from 
 private companies. However, the city should reserve the 
 right to construct its own plant. 
 
 B. Competition : 
 
 1. The duplication of investment and equipment, the damage 
 to the pavement, and the injury to the appearance of the 
 city, make competition wasteful, ultimately add to the price 
 paid by the consumer, and finally induce public lighting 
 corporations to merge. 
 
 2. The company which supplies commercial lighting can 
 supply public lighting at a minimum cost to the city, 
 because: 
 
 (a) Every increase in the demand for service means a 
 decrease in the cost of production. 
 
 (&) An electrical plant, primarily for street lighting, 
 cannot be operated economically since its daily out- 
 put is small and it is under full load for less than 
 half the time. A commercial plant is under a more 
 nearly uniform load during the twenty-four hours of 
 the day. 
 
 (c) A private company can take immediate advantage 
 of inventions and improvements for reducing the cost 
 of production. Municipal plants, as is shown by 
 experience, seldom keep pace with modern and im- 
 proved methods. 
 
 3. Your committee is of the opinion* that a resort to com- 
 petition, while it might assist in reducing exorbitant rates 
 temporarily, is only a makeshift; and that permanently 
 satisfactory results and a minimum cost for lighting can- 
 not be secured by competition. 
 
 C. Regulation and Control of Existing and Future 
 
 Companies : 
 
 1. The Enabling Act of 1907 gives the city full power and 
 authority to fix and determine a reasonable rate both for 
 gas and electricity, and to provide and enforce fines for 
 the violation thereof. 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 2. A Public Utilities Commission, composed of competent 
 and trustworthy business and technical men, should be 
 provided immediately by ordinance, with such powers as 
 are prescribed by the Enabling Act. 
 
 VI. Payment for electricity and gas should be based upon metered 
 service — the maximum cost per lamp per year being fixed by 
 ordinance. 
 
 VII. No contract should be made for gas or electric lighting covering a 
 long period of years, and it should contain provisions for frequent 
 readjustment of rates and a clause enabling the city, at intervals, to 
 require the substitution of new and more efficient styles of lamps. 
 Only in this way can the public reap the advantage of the rapid 
 reduction being made in the cost of gas and electric light as a result 
 of new inventions and improvements. 
 
 VIII. A uniform system of efficient and ornamental lighting should be 
 established, especially for the business streets, of the city. 
 
 (a) In the business partion electroliers or arc lamps of 
 uniform style should be adopted and so spaced as to 
 brilliantly illuminate the streets by night and make them 
 attractive by day. 
 
 (ft) In the residential portion it may be deemed advisable 
 to supplement the present gas lights with arc lights at 
 street intersections in order to secure adequate illumination. 
 
 IX. In all of the conclusions reached, the committee is unanimously of 
 the opinion that a definite and reasonable regulation and control of 
 prices and service, determined by a Public Utilities Commission, per- 
 manently established by ordinance under recent statute, is funda- 
 mentally essential. 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 9 
 
 History of Street Lighting in St. Louis 
 
 Public lighting of the streets of Saint Louis begins with the year 
 1836, when Ordinance No. 306 was passed authorizing the Mayor to 
 contract with the Saint Louis Gas Work Company for lighting the 
 city under an exclusive contract, for a term of twenty-five years. The 
 illuminant was specified to be carburetted hydrogen gas, the city obli- 
 gating itself to furnish “as much water from the water works of the 
 city as shall be necessary for carrying on the operations of generating 
 and purifying the gas * * * * providing that the quantity of 
 water to be thus taken shall not exceed one hundred gallons a day.’’ 
 The city agreed to pay the Saint Louis Gas Work Company “one cent 
 for each cubic foot of gas consumed by the street lamps of the city,” 
 and gas mains and lights were required to be installed on Water and 
 First Streets before November first, 1836. The city retained the right 
 to purchase the gas plant at the end of the twenty-five years under a 
 fixed arrangement; failing which, the exclusive privilege of the com- 
 pany was to be extended an additional twenty-five years. 
 
 Many Ordinances Passed 
 
 In the succeeding seventy years, more than one hundred ordinances, 
 dealing with the lighting of streets, have been passed, the earlier ones 
 relating only to the company already mentioned, but under its usual 
 designation of “The Saint Louis Gas Light Company;” and later ordi- 
 nances were passed concerning other companies that entered the field 
 as the exclusive privilege became forfeited, as the city extended its 
 limits or as the franchise lapsed. 
 
 In 1841, the city of Saint Louis became a stock holder in the 
 Saint Louis Gas Light Company to the extent of five hundred shares, 
 the ordinance requiring this action being passed over the Mayor’s 
 veto. This city ownership of stock continued for nearly fifty years; 
 for, in 1889, the Municipal Assembly authorized and directed the sale 
 of “one hundred and ninety-nine shares of the capital stock of the 
 Saint Louis Gas Light Company at a sum not less than four hundred 
 dollars per share.” In 1841 the streets were lighted as far west as 
 Seventh Street, and in 1850, as far as Sixteenth Street. 
 
 Serious attempts were made to purchase the property of the com- 
 pany mentioned, particularly in 1864. On June 25th of that year an 
 ordinance directed the Mayor to notify the Saint Louis Gas Light Com- 
 pany that it was the intention to purchase its property at the expira- 
 tion of the specified twenty-five years. After official consideration of 
 the proposition for a number of weeks, during which the City Assembly 
 seemed to favor the purchase and the executive department to oppose 
 
10 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 it (the City Counsellor meanwhile giving his opinion that, under com- 
 plications that had arisen, the purchase could not be legally effected), 
 the matter was finally settled adversely by the Mayor vetoing an ordi- 
 nance providing definitely for such purchase. 
 
 In 1865, the city contracted with the Saint Louis Gas Lighting 
 Company to light the streets of the city at “actual cost thereof,” the 
 cost to include “dividends not exceeding eight per cent per annum” 
 and all expense of operation, repairs and extension, except the cost of 
 new mains or lamps, which were made special assessments upon property 
 fronting upon the proposed improvement. This contract was to expire 
 in 1890, and was affected in some of its provisions by statutes involving 
 a considerable measure of state supervision. 
 
 In 1866, a city gas inspector was authorized at a salary of $2000 
 per annum, and fees, out of which he was to pay all the expenses of 
 his office. Among his duties was the inspection and reading of gas 
 meters; meters lacking such seal allowed the householder to avoid all 
 payment for gas consumed. In 1870, the salary was reduced to $300 
 per annum, the fee of fifty cents for inspection of gas or apparatus under 
 mistaken complaint still remaining in force. In 1873, this salary was 
 again changed, this time to $3000 per annum, without fees. In 1889, 
 Ordinance No. 15105 authorized a Supervisor of City Lighting, at a salary 
 of $2500 per annum, with a clerk and inspectors at a salary of $1200 
 per year, each. 
 
 Territory Divided Between Two Companies 
 
 In 1873, a contract was made with the Laclede Gas Light Com- 
 pany, the Saint Louis Gas Light Company assenting, to engage in the 
 making and selling of gas in the northern part of the city, northward 
 from the buildings fronting on the southern line of Washington Avenue 
 to the extreme limits of the city. This contract was to expire in 1890, 
 and the company was to receive $30.00 per lamp per annum for gas 
 for lighting the streets and $7.00 each additional for cleaning, lighting, 
 extinguishing, and keeping the street lamps in repair; and $3.25 per 
 thousand cubic feet from private consumers, with reduction in price 
 to $3.10 per thousand if the price of coal for making gas should be 
 reduced from thirty cents to twenty-five cents per bushel; if the price 
 of coal should become twenty cents per bushel, the maximum charge 
 to private consumers was to be $3.00 per thousand cubic feet. 
 
 Under ordinances passed in 1874 and 1875, the city contracted with 
 the Carondelet Gas Light Company “for the lighting of the southern 
 portion of the city of St. Louis,” at the rates mentioned in the pre- 
 ceding paragraph. The territory affected by this contract was in the 
 extended city limits, south of Keokuk Street. 
 
 Gasoline for Street Lighting 
 
 In 1880, the city began the lighting, by gasoline lamps under direct 
 control of the Board of Public Improvements, of relatively small outly- 
 ing areas of new territory, added by the extension of the city limits, 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 11 
 
 where contract lighting did not extend. In 1882, a contract was made 
 with the Ohio Valley Street Lighting Company of Cincinnati to light 
 with gasoline the greater part of this extended western territory of 
 the city. This contract was to be in force for five years, but was amended 
 in 1884 to expire in 1890, as was the case with all the street lighting 
 contracts then in force. The price fixed upon was $28.00 per lamp per 
 year, and the contracting company agreed to pay the city $6.00 per 
 lamp for the posts, burners, etc., that had been erected by the city 
 in the territory to be occupied by this company. 
 
 In 1886, an ordinance became a law granting to the Saint Louis 
 Gas Light Company until the year 1920 privileges of laying and main- 
 taining gas pipes and mains, etc., from Keokuk Street to Washington 
 Avenue, and from the Mississippi River to the western limits of the 
 city. The exclusive and valuable privileges granted to the same com- 
 pany by the ordinance of 1873 were to definitely and specifically termi- 
 nate January 1, 1890. The price to private consumers was to be not 
 more than $1.25 per thousand cubic feet furnished, and if required 
 it agreed to light the streets in its territory at an annual cost to the 
 city of $20.00 per lamp. In the same year, a similar ordinance cov- 
 ering the whole area of the city of St. Louis was passed in favor of 
 the Saint Louis Gas, Fuel and Power Company, also permitting sale 
 of its contract privileges. 
 
 Municipal Lighting Considered 
 
 In 1888, the second serious consideration of the advisability of direct 
 municipal lighting of the city streets was authorized by Ordinance 
 No. 14604, which provided for a commission to negotiate a lease of the 
 Laclede Gas Light Company and the Saint Louis Gas Light Company. 
 No definite results followed this movement, for there seems to have 
 been repeated the division of opinion upon the advisability of the propo- 
 sition that characterized the question a quarter of a century before. 
 After five months of controversy over the proposition, the commission 
 reported that, before making any recommendation, “it is essential that 
 the opinion of the Municipal Assembly shall be taken on the main 
 proposition, namely, is it desirable that the city of Saint Louis shall 
 enter on the business of manufacturing and selling gas for illuminating, 
 heat and power purposes on and after January 1, 1890, provided satis- 
 factory terms for the acquisition of the gas property can be made.” 
 This report was referred to another committee; and after various vicis- 
 situdes the project slept. 
 
 Lighting by Electricity 
 
 In 1890, the lighting of the streets by electricity was begun. The 
 number of lights in operation, during the year previous for the light- 
 ing of the city streets, was as follows: 
 
12 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 Gas lamps of the Laclede Gas Light Co 8,018 
 
 Gas lamps of the Carondelet Gas Light Co 691 
 
 Gasoline lamps , 933 
 
 9,642 
 
 The disappearance of the Saint Louis Gas Light Company from the 
 table above is explained by its absorption by the Laclede Company. 
 
 The gas lighting contracts of the city expired January 1, 1890; 
 as new contracts had not been made for the lighting of the streets 
 the old rates for gas lamps were continued temporarily. The lighting 
 of the northern part of the city was contracted for by the Laclede Gas 
 Light Company, and that of the southern section of the city by the 
 Missouri (later the Missouri Edison) Electric Light and Power Com- 
 pany, both contracts to expire January 1, 1900. Under these contracts, 
 the streets were lighted by arc lights and the alleys by incandescent elec- 
 tric lights. 
 
 At the expiration of the above contracts, the usual failure to have 
 lighting of the streets adequately considered in its various aspects, in 
 time for carrying into effect such conclusions as might be reached, was 
 again encountered; in fact the situation was so serious that the greater 
 part of the city was in darkness for more than a month. The street 
 lighting contracts expired on January 1st, 1900, and consequently on 
 Monday night all alleys, parks and public buildings from Washington 
 Avenue to Keokuk Street, and from the river to the western limits 
 of the city, were in darkness except for the Insane Asylum, the Super- 
 intendent of which paid $75.00 out of his own pocket for a continuance 
 of its lighting for one week. The other city institutions made use of 
 candles, coal oil lamps, lanterns, etc., for illuminating purposes. On 
 January 3d, a public-spirited citizen agreed to pay the cost of the 
 electric lighting of the City Hospital; and later, others responded in a 
 similar way. On January 4th, a fire was caused in Engine House No. 6, 
 by an accident to an oil lamp. The fact that the streets still were 
 lighted by arc lights was due to a ruling of the City Counsellor that 
 that particular contract did not expire until April 30, 1900. A daily 
 paper on January 2, 1900, contains the following: 
 
 “The Municipal Assembly and the Mayor, which alone have the 
 power under the City Charter to avert the crisis that has come upon 
 Saint Louis, have known for the full term of their offices that the time 
 of the expiration of the electric lighting contracts was approaching, 
 yet they have taken no action toward averting it. * * * * In 
 nearly half of the city the public buildings are practically in dark- 
 ness, the alleys are in complete darkness and are rendezvous that 
 
 thieves and thugs can safely seek; the parks are in total dark- 
 ness. * * * * The fire engine houses are in at least partial 
 
 darkness, and to that extent the efficiency of the department on 
 which depends the safety of millions of dollars’ worth of property 
 is impaired; the eleemosynary institutions are forced to the use 
 
 of candles and coal oil lamps. * * * * There is no par- 
 
 ticular reason for the incandescent lighting in the district north of 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 13 
 
 Washington Avenue, except that the Laclede Gas Light Company, which 
 holds the contract, decided to continue the service, and run the risk 
 of getting paid for it.” 
 
 Serious Delay in Passing Ordinances 
 
 The facts seem to be that, not only were general street lighting 
 ordinances delayed until too late, but special (temporary) lighting bills 
 sent to the City Assembly by the Board of Public Improvements, to 
 prevent the impending danger of darkness, remained in the Assembly 
 from November 17, 1899, to January 5, 1900, before securing action; on 
 the latter date they were killed by adverse vote. These rejected bills 
 provided for a short time continuance of the previous contracts at pre- 
 vious rates. 
 
 On January 7th, three new temporary lighting bills, of similar im- 
 port to those rejected, were introduced. Daily mass-meetings of citizens 
 were held, increasing in fervor, and plans were adopted to make very 
 plain the attitude and opinion of the citizens concerning the conditions 
 •existing at the time. On January 16th, the greatly desired temporary 
 lighting bills were passed and signed by the Mayor. Bids were then 
 asked for, and finally, on February 2nd, contracts were signed for again 
 lighting the city until September 1, 1900; and the lights were turned 
 on that evening. 
 
 Present Contracts Expire in 1910 
 
 The present contracts provide for the electric lighting of the central 
 portion of the city by the Union Electric Light and Power Company, 
 and the lighting of the remainder of the streets by incandescent gas 
 mantles by the Welsbach Street Lighting Company of America, as 
 authorized by Ordinances, Nos. 19892, 19913 and 19915. These con- 
 tracts will expire September 1, 1910. In April, 1907, there were in 
 use for the contract lighting 1082 arc lamps, costing the city about 
 $97.50 per lamp per year; 4538 incandescent lamps, costing about $19.65 
 each, per year; and 17079 (gas) mantle lamps, costing the city nearly 
 $27.00 per lamp per year. The Laclede Gas Light Company and 
 the Union Electric Light and Power Company are the only private 
 corporations at present extensively furnishing gas or electricity in 
 Saint Louis for public or private use; and these two companies are 
 practically one and the same — the stock in both being controlled by 
 the same stockholders. 
 
 This brief sketch of the history of street lighting in St. Louis is 
 given to show that the problem is growing more and more complicated 
 as the city expands, and that every effort should be made to determine 
 definitely months in advance of the expiration of present contracts, 
 what policy the city will adopt for the future — whether the city will 
 do its own lighting or whether it should continue for the present, at 
 least, to light the streets and public buildings by contract. 
 
14 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 Ownership and Operation of Lighting Plant 
 
 (Private or Municipal.) 
 
 In the examination of the best method of lighting to be adopted 
 by the city of St. Louis the first question to be determined is, shall 
 the city construct and operate its own plant or shall the work be done 
 under contract by a private company. Certain well established facts 
 as to the nature of the work must be kept in mind in the consideration 
 of this question. 
 
 Street Lighting a Natural Monopoly 
 
 I. Street lighting is a municipal function of a distinctly public 
 character. It is not one which can be left to the whims of the indi- 
 vidual citizens nor to the business acumen of lighting corporations. The 
 use of the streets for wires, poles and conduits; the interference of 
 these wires with the work of the fire department; the necessity of some 
 uniformity in the style of lamp posts and fixtures, and also in the 
 kind and amount of lighting, makes it an undertaking which the 
 municipality itself must either perform or regulate and control. 
 
 II. Street lighting, cannot, in the long run, be secured at a mini- 
 mum cost to the city, by competition. The division of the work between 
 two or more companies means a duplication of equipment and invest- 
 ment, a corresponding increase in maintenance charges which ren- 
 ders it economically wasteful; and economic waste means higher charges 
 for light. Economy in lighting is increased not by competition and 
 division, but by cooperation and concentration. Competition may, as 
 a corrective measure, secure the reduction of an exorbitant price to a 
 reasonable one, temporarily; but the economic waste involved in the 
 duplication of the plant will inevitably bring the total cost, for a period 
 of years, to a figure higher than is necessary, in order to repay the 
 extra outlay for duplication. The history of competing gas and electric 
 public service corporations in this city, as well as in all other cities, 
 goes to show that gradually they have become merged into one for the 
 simple reason that public lighting is a form of service which will not 
 admit of competition. 
 
 Where, however, regulation of rates, to prevent extortionate charges, 
 is available, through a Public Utilities Commission, it surely is wise 
 thus to secure reasonable rates, rather than to subject a city to losses 
 and inconveniences involved in duplicating plants. An apparent ex- 
 ception to this principle occurs when the competition involves some 
 principle so relatively novel as to be practically revolutionary in char- 
 acter. For example, if it proves feasible to bring natural gas to the 
 city, its cost for illuminating the residential portion of the city may 
 be so much less than the cost of producing artificial gas for this pur- 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 15 
 
 pose that a competitive franchise of this character may be a very wise 
 procedure, both in the interest of street lighting and of the private 
 use of gas. 
 
 III. Street lighting, both gas and electricity, are subject to the 
 law of increasing returns: i. e., every expansion of the plant and its 
 equipment and every increase in the demand for service means a de- 
 crease in the cost of production. Hence, one source of supply and one 
 system of distribution means a minimum cost of light to the con- 
 sumer. 
 
 These generally accepted principles as to the nature of the under- 
 taking make it clear that the functions of street lighting is non-com- 
 petitive in character, and one which the municipal government itself 
 must either perform or carefully regulate and control. 
 
 Advantages and Disadvantages of Municipal Ownership 
 
 The question of the advisability of installing a municipal lighting 
 plant is a complex one. In a general way the arguments for and 
 against the public ownership and operation of public utilities apply to 
 the case in question. Earnest advocates of such ownership have many 
 arguments and examples with which to fortify their position; and op- 
 ponents of public ownership also strongly maintain their convictions 
 by forceful reasoning and pertinent example. 
 
 The advocates of municipal ownership and operation of public light- 
 ing advance three main arguments to prove their case, namely: 
 
 a. Municipal ownership and operation will remove from the field 
 of municipal politics the corrupt influence of a franchise holding cor- 
 poration. 
 
 b. It will expand the civic conscience and increase the interest of 
 the citizens in municipal affairs. 
 
 c. It will reduce the cost of the service and at the same time in- 
 crease its quality. 
 
 No Advantages Politically 
 
 Politically considered, there is no advantage in municipal owner- 
 ship. Its disadvantages may amount to nothing, or may be considerable, 
 or even very serious. These dangers are of two kinds: that of the cor- 
 ruption of the management of such a public utility to the extent of a 
 partial or complete control of the votes of employes; or that of external 
 pressure on the management by influential politicians, such as inducing' 
 the appointment of their adherents to comfortable berths or (as stated 
 to have occurred in the Philadelphia Gas case), refusing as members of 
 the city council to appropriate funds for necessary repairs and improve- 
 ments for the apparent purpose of securing a lease of the discredited 
 works for themselves or friends. So strongly does the danger of such 
 possible results appeal to some that they consider them fatal. 
 
 If the political advantages of municipal ownership are at best nega- 
 tive and the dangers are sometimes very positive and serious, it is 
 
16 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 also equally evident that the alternative, that is, private ownership of 
 public utilities, does not at all insure the political integrity of public 
 officials; it merely changes the lines of attack from the administrative 
 officials of the municipal plant to legislative officials in whose hands 
 is the power of voting franchises or privileges, or imposing restrictions 
 and penalties. Rather is there a greater danger of periodic bargaining 
 and bribery which, though probably more easily detected and punished, 
 is so insidious and radical in its deplorable effects on republican insti- 
 tutions that many consider them really “destructive of political purity, 
 democracy, and free institutions.” The possible danger of control of 
 votes for a party in power is greater in the municipally owned plant, 
 but the safeguarding of the integrity of public officers can claim no de- 
 cided advantage for either system Ox ownership. However, it would 
 appear that the essence of the discussion on this point would reduce 
 itself to the question whether the public can, in the long run, more 
 safely trust to the fidelity of the executive officers of the municipal 
 plant, or to that of its legislative officers concerned with legislation 
 affecting the private corporation. In either case integrity must exist. 
 
 Every one must admit that there is a certain civic interest created 
 and developed where a city owns and operates successfully one or more 
 of its own public utilities. This results more particularly from the 
 successful operation of such utilities as the street railways, water 
 supply and gas supply, those which affect intimately the daily comfort 
 and convenience of the inhabitants. The citizen is constantly reminded 
 of the advantages which come from their proper management, but with 
 street lighting, important as it is to the social and economic welfare of 
 the city, he is reminded of its importance only when he finds himself 
 in darkness or unprotected from the attacks of street ruffians. In 
 the recent investigations of the National Civic Federation into the 
 ownership and operation of the electric lighting plants in American and 
 European cities, the committee found in Chicago and Detroit, the only 
 large cities which own and operate their own lighting plants, that the 
 interest is at best only passive and the attitudes of the public press is 
 one of indifference. 
 
 Civic Interest Depends Upon Successful Operation 
 
 The arousing of a healthy civic interest through the operation of 
 public utilities is wholly dependent upon the successful operation of the 
 utility in question. This presupposes an already existing interest on 
 the part of the citizens sufficient to insure at least a safe and business- 
 like control of the municipal plant; which means the appointment of 
 employees who can and will operate it with approximately the same de- 
 gree of care and skill as if it belonged to a private company. This 
 interest is usually present in the municipal operation of those utilities 
 which affect primarily the public health but, as has been pointed out, 
 public lighting does not fall in this group of utilities. Hence, men 
 are likely to be appointed to office because of their political affiliations 
 and with little thought as to their skill and training in this particular 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 17 
 
 field of work. The successful operation of a lighting plant requires 
 men with more than usual technical skill and training. Such men 
 are not, as a rule, secured for municipal work because of the political 
 influences at work and because the salaries are usually so low that 
 they furnish no inducement to highly trained men to leave the em- 
 ployment of private companies in order to enter the uncertain field of 
 municipal public service. 
 
 Opinion of an Unprejudiced Committee. 
 
 The report of the Committee of the National Civic Federation on 
 the ownership and operation of public utilities in American and English 
 cities, the most representative and conclusive report on this subject 
 yet published, says on this point: 
 
 “Our investigations teach us that no municipal operation is likely 
 to be highly successful that does not provide for: 
 
 First — An executive manager with full responsibility, holding his 
 position during good behavior. 
 
 Second — Exclusion of political influence and personal favoritism from 
 the management of the undertaking.” 
 
 “We wish to bring to your consideration the danger here in the 
 United States of turning over these public utilities to the present gov- 
 ernment of some of our cities. Some, we know, are well governed and 
 the situation on the whole seems to be improving, but they are not up 
 to the government of British cities. We found in England and Scot- 
 land a high type of municipal government which is the result of many 
 years of struggle and improvement. Business men seem to take a pride 
 in serving as city councilors and aldermen, and the government of 
 such cities as Glasgow, Manchester, Birmingham and others includes 
 many of the best citizens of the city. These conditions are distinctly 
 favorable to municipal operation.” 
 
 “In the United States, as is well known, there are many cities not 
 in such a favorable condition. It is charged that the political activity 
 of public service corporations has in many instances been responsible 
 for the unwillingness or inability of American cities to secure a higher 
 type of public service. This charge we believe to be true. However, 
 there seems to be an idea with many people that the mere taking by 
 the city of all its public utilities for municipal operation will at once 
 result in ideal government through the very necessity of putting honest 
 and competent citizens in charge. While an increase in the number 
 and importance of municipal functions may have a tendency to induce 
 men of a higher type to become public officials, we do not believe this 
 of itself will accomplish municipal reform. We are unable to recom- 
 mend municipal ownership as a political panacea.” 
 
 Will Municipal Ownership Pay? 
 
 Whatever may be the political and social conditions which make 
 municipal ownership doubtful, the decisive consideration is the economic 
 one — “Will municipal lighting pay?” Under proper regulation and em- 
 
18 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 ploying correct details, that kind of ownership of a public service is best 
 for a city which gives it the better service for the same cost, or an 
 equal service at a lesser cost. We are confronted at once with the 
 fact that of the first fifteen cities in the United States only two have 
 tried the experiment of municipal ownership and operation of street 
 lighting, and this has been confined to electricity. The two cities are 
 Chicago and Detroit. 
 
 A number of cities of less than 50,000 inhabitants have experimented 
 more or less successfully with municipal lighting, but the conditions 
 in a city of 50,000 people are so totally different from those of a city of 
 500,000 or 700,000 that any attempt to determine policies for a large 
 city on the experiences of cities of less than one-tenth its population 
 is certain to prove futile. Smaller cities can more logically undertake 
 municipal ownership of lighting plants because the people are in closer 
 touch with the government of the city and the officials are known to 
 every one; while in a larger city not only do the people not come in 
 contact with the officials, but the question of lighting is so big and so 
 complicated that the average citizen finds it almost impossible to gain an 
 accurate knowledge of the facts and conditions. 
 
 British Experience No Criterion 
 
 Reference is made repeatedly to the successful financial experience 
 of British cities in the municipal ownership and operation of street 
 lighting plants. Sixty-five per cent of the British cities are performing 
 this service economically and satisfactorily and the reports show that, 
 on the whole, these cities are not only getting better service for a less 
 cost, but the condition of the laborers, both as regards salaries and 
 hours, is better than in plants owned and operated by private corpora- 
 tions. But, as has been pointed out, we can not with any degree of fair- 
 ness or accuracy use the successful experience of English cities for 
 examples of what American cities can do in substituting municipal own- 
 ership for private ownership. The political and social conditions and 
 the municipal ideals of those cities are so radically different from 
 our own that tables of comparative statistics would be wholly un- 
 reliable as furnishing a basis for a similar policy in this city. The 
 National Civic Federation report says further on this point: 
 
 “Finally, not only must it be borne in mind that the social and 
 political conditions which characterize the two countries (England and 
 the United States) find expression in their private and public systems, 
 but we consider the difference in the nature of the two peoples which 
 cause them to adopt different ideas and views as to the expediency of 
 certain things. In other words a measure of success in the municipal 
 management of public utilities in England should not he regarded as 
 necessarily indicating that the municipal management of the same utili- 
 ties in this country would he followed by a like measure of success. 
 Conditions are quite different in the two countries.” 
 
 It would seem, therefore, that for purposes of comparison we must 
 be limited to the experience of the two cities in this country, Chicago 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 19 
 
 and Detroit, which have adopted the policy of municipal ownership and 
 operation of electric lighting plants. 
 
 Here, again, we are confronted with the difficulty of getting at the 
 real gross cost to these cities for the service. In spite of the fact that the 
 annual reports from the officers in charge of these plants are supposed 
 to state cold facts and give every detail of expense connected with the 
 operation of the plants, a careful examination of the books and accounts 
 by expert accountants show that these officers are advocates of a cause 
 rather than disinterested compilers of statistics. Fortunately, however, 
 we are not compelled to rely upon the figures as given by these officials, 
 but can go directly to the reports of the public accountants. 
 
 Items of Cost to be Included 
 
 The chief items which should be included in any true estimate of 
 the gross cost of supplying lights to a city are as follows: 
 
 I. Operating Cost. — This covers not only the cost of generation but 
 of distribution, and includes such items as fuel, water, oil, wages, salaries, 
 rent, maintenance, repairs, etc. Salaries should include a proportionate 
 share of the expense of whatever departments of the city government 
 are charged with any portion of the management of the plant. If the 
 accounts are kept by the Comptroller’s department, then a fair pro- 
 portion of the expense of that office should be charged to operating ex- 
 penses. If the plant occupies a part of a public building used for other 
 purposes, then a fair proportion of the rent of that building should be 
 charged to operating expenses. In short, whatever supplies or services 
 the electric plant received from any other department of the city gov- 
 ernment should be included in the expense of operation. 
 
 II. Depreciation. — This cost must be considered on apparatus, build- 
 ing, lines, lamps, and every thing which has to do with the production 
 and distribution of electricity, with the exception of the land on which 
 the building is located. The question of depreciation is one on which 
 there is always a great variety of opinions. If it were merely the 
 question of duplicating worn out machinery the percentage of depre- 
 ciation could easily be estimated, but in the electrical business it is 
 not the simple wearing out of the machinery that causes depreciation. 
 It is the progress of the art of electric lighting and the rapid changes 
 which are constantly being made in electrical devices and equipment. 
 So rapid has this progress been that what was modern equipment ten 
 years ago is now largely scrap. Scarcely a piece of machinery ten years 
 old but what must be discarded in favor of a more efficient and economical 
 substitute. 
 
 III. Interest on the Investment. — This should be estimated on the 
 basis of the average rate of interest paid on the bonds of the city. 
 
 IV. Sinking Fund. — The portion of revenue set aside each year to 
 retire the bonds issued to build or purchase the plant. 
 
20 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 V. Taxes. — An amount equivalent to the sum which the city loses, 
 if it, instead of the private company, owns and operates the plant. 
 
 VI. Insurance. — An annual premium on an amount sufficient to re- 
 place the plant were it destroyed by fire. 
 
 These items have all been included in the recent report of the 
 National Civic Federation in its exhaustive investigation of the De- 
 troit and Chicago plants. The report of Marwick, Mitchell & Co., char- 
 tered accountants, who were employed to make the investigation into 
 the financial affairs of the electric light plants can, we think, be accepted 
 as the most trustworthy report yet issued on the actual cost to these 
 cities of the lighting of their streets. 
 
 Chicago 
 
 A condensed summary of their report on Chicago is herewith at- 
 tached : 
 
 CHICAGO MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC LIGHT WORKS. 
 
 I. A summary of expenditures to December 31, 1905, including cost 
 of land, construction of plants and extension of system: 
 
 1. Cost of construction and equipment of the plants 
 
 and extension of the system $2,288,665.77 
 
 2. Land 79,340.74 
 
 3. Total capital expenditure $2,368,006.51 
 
 From which deduct: — 
 
 (a) Estimated value of Throop street plant 
 
 and land sold in 1892 $103,890.28 
 
 (b) Depreciation (being amount necessary 
 
 to reduce the book value of the plant 
 to the appraised value stated by en- 
 gineers) 941,610.65 
 
 (c) Depreciation in value of land 6,798.40 $1,052,299.33 
 
 4. Appraised value as at Dec. 31, 1905... $1,315,707.18 
 
 II. A summary of the cost of operation from 1888 to December 31, 
 1905, including taxes, depreciation, insurance, water, rent, salaries, wages, 
 etc. 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 21 
 
 Cost Per Arc Lamp Per Annum 
 
 Cost of Opera- Average Number 
 
 tion (Exclusive of 
 
 Year of Interest.) Arc Lamps. 
 
 Exclusive 
 
 of 
 
 Interest. 
 
 Including Com- 
 pound Interest at 
 4 per cent 
 per annum on 
 Capital Invested. 
 
 1888 
 
 
 $ 16,732.29 
 
 
 192 
 
 $ 87.15 
 
 $101.83 
 
 1889 
 
 
 59,304.61 
 
 
 297 
 
 199.68 
 
 238.33 
 
 1890 
 
 
 116,824.79 
 
 
 900 
 
 129.61 
 
 155.19 
 
 1891 
 
 
 173,434.33 
 
 
 993 
 
 174.76 
 
 207.28 
 
 1892 
 
 
 176,365.24 
 
 
 1,102 
 
 160.04 
 
 192.17 
 
 1893 
 
 
 183,081.00 
 
 
 1,112 
 
 164.64 
 
 196.97 
 
 1894 
 
 
 175,589.10 
 
 
 1,108 
 
 158.47 
 
 194.06 
 
 1905 
 
 
 185,772.52 
 
 
 1,116 
 
 166.46 
 
 205.86 
 
 1896 
 
 
 188,441.07 
 
 
 1,254 
 
 150.27 
 
 188.39 
 
 1897 
 
 
 174,560.91 
 
 
 1,438 
 
 121.39 
 
 156.99 
 
 1898 
 
 
 187,393.73 
 
 
 1,710 
 
 109.00 
 
 142.76 
 
 1899 
 
 
 246,051.06 
 
 
 2,893 
 
 85.32 
 
 109.04 
 
 1900 
 
 
 355,629.32 
 
 
 3,867 
 
 91.96 
 
 112.53 
 
 1901 
 
 
 366,763.85 
 
 
 4,305 
 
 85.19 
 
 101.24 
 
 1902 
 
 
 362,177.93 
 
 
 4,508 
 
 80.34 
 
 99.28 
 
 1903 
 
 
 379,283.15 
 
 
 4,827 
 
 78.57 
 
 98.78 
 
 1904 
 
 
 390,144.44 
 
 
 5,034 
 
 77.60 
 
 106.45 
 
 1905 
 
 
 491,006.52 
 
 
 5,743 
 
 85.49 
 
 100.06 
 
 Total 
 
 cost 
 
 of operation. $4, 228, 555. 86 
 
 
 42,399 
 
 $ 99.73 
 
 $124.32 
 
 
 III. 
 
 A summary of the number 
 
 of lamps 
 
 rented from private 
 
 corporations from 1890 to December 
 
 31, 
 
 1905, and 
 
 the average cost per 
 
 light. 
 
 Year 
 
 1890 
 
 1891 
 
 1892 
 1898 
 
 1894 
 
 1895 
 
 1896 
 
 1897 
 
 1898 
 
 1899 
 
 1900 
 
 1901 
 
 1902 
 
 1903 
 
 1904 
 
 1905 
 
 Average Number 
 of Lamps. 
 
 93 
 
 166 
 
 174 
 
 184 
 
 203 
 
 524 
 
 480 
 
 492 
 
 515 
 
 529 
 
 665 
 
 671 
 
 600 
 
 611 
 
 656 
 
 643 
 
 Average Cost per 
 Lamp per annum. 
 
 $177.95 
 
 174.33 
 
 174.63 
 
 155.62 
 
 137.38 
 
 103.38 
 
 113.28 
 113.23 
 109.10 
 
 103.28 
 102.84 
 101.58 
 102.66 
 102.82 
 102.92 
 102.52 
 
 IV. A comparison of the cost to the city by municipal operation 
 and the cost if all the lamps had been rented from a private corporation 
 under the rates at which a portion were rented: 
 
22 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 Cost of construction 
 
 Cost of Operation (1888-1905) 
 
 Amount with 
 Simple Interest, 
 
 4 per cent. 
 
 $2,264,116.23 
 
 4,228,555.86 
 
 Amount with 
 Compouud 
 Interest. 
 
 $2,264,116.23 
 
 4,228,555.86 
 
 Total 
 
 Less depreciation of plant 
 
 $6,492,672.09 
 
 941,610.65 
 
 $6,492,672.09 
 
 941,610.65 
 
 Interest on cost of construction and operation, 
 
 less depreciation $1,635,480.27 
 
 $2,034,008.52 
 
 Less appraised value of plant, Dec., 
 
 $7,186,541.81 
 ’05 1,315,707.18 
 
 $7,585,069.96 
 
 1,315,707.18 
 
 Total cost of municipal operation- 
 Dec. 31, 1905 
 
 -1888— 
 
 $5,870,834.63 
 
 $6,269,362.78 
 
 Probable cost if rented (based on the average 
 cost per lamp paid in the past for rented 
 
 lights) $4,744,550.20 
 
 Interest thereon 1,133,299.18 
 
 Total cost (1888 — Dec. 31, 1905) of lights, if 
 
 rented $5,877,849.38 $6,104,440.82 
 
 On the basis of simple interest the estimated net saving to the city 
 by operating its own plant would be ($5,877,849.38 — $5,870,834.63) 
 $7,014.75. On the basis of compound interest, the estimated loss to the 
 city by operating its own plant would be ($6,269,362.78 — $6,104,440.82) 
 $164,921.96, or stated in tabulated form: — 
 
 $4,744,550.20 
 
 1,359,890.62 
 
 OPERATING COST WITH SIMPLE INTEREST (4%) 
 
 Gain to the city $ 
 
 Loss to the city $ 164,921.96 
 
 Total Cost. 
 
 $5,870,834.63 
 
 5,877,849.38 
 
 per Year. 
 
 $138.46 
 
 138.63 
 
 $ 7,014.75 
 
 $ 0.17 
 
 UND INTEREST. 
 
 $6,269,362.78 
 
 $147.87 
 
 6,104,440.82 
 
 143.98 
 
 $ 164,921.96 
 
 $ 3.86 
 
 Detroit 
 
 The Detroit public lighting plant was established in 1895 and placed 
 under the control of a non-partisan commission appointed by the Mayor 
 and approved by the Council. A bond issue of $800,000 was authorized 
 by the state and approved by the people. The original investment for 
 land, building and equipment was $655,508.90. The records for the 
 eleven years, 1895-1906, show that the entire amount appropriated by 
 the Council and paid out by the city on account of the lighting plant 
 was as follows: 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 23 
 
 Original investment 
 
 1895 
 
 1896 
 
 1897 
 
 1898 
 
 1899 
 
 1900 
 
 1901 
 
 1902 
 
 1903 
 
 1904 
 
 1905 
 
 1906 
 
 Total investment 
 
 Total, operating and maintenance 
 
 Operation. 
 
 $ 125,603.27 
 
 124.255.00 
 
 121,000.00 
 
 56.000. 00 
 
 95.000. 00 
 
 96.000. 00 
 
 98.000. 00 
 
 103.975.00 
 
 117.917.00 
 122,246.15 
 121,380.41 
 126,971.63 
 
 $1,308,358.44 
 
 $605,508.90 
 
 Investment. 
 
 Included in 1897 
 Included in 1897 
 
 $123,713.83 
 
 60,923.00 
 
 23,657.74 
 
 14,284.53 
 
 23,566.83 
 
 80,577.37 
 
 37,992.09 
 
 63,903.97 
 
 91,523.48 
 
 66,857.24 
 
 $587,000.08 
 
 $1,192,508.98 
 
 1,308,358.44 
 
 Grand total paid by city for lighting $2,500,867.42 
 
 The accountants for the National Civic Federation Committee found 
 the books of the Detroit Lighting Commission well kept and satisfactory 
 in the main, but the following items were not included in the financial 
 returns and charged to operating expense: taxes, insurance, rental, 
 interest on bonds, sinking fund, and charges for the services of city 
 officials, other than those directly employed in the lighting department. 
 
 Furthermore, depreciation was estimated at only 3%, which the 
 accountants considered too low. In 1905, the cost of operation, accord- 
 ing to the Detroit Commission’s report, was $121,380.41. To this the 
 accountants added taxes, which a private company would pay, of $8,705, 
 or $2.51 per arc light, and depreciation of $42,818.72 or $12.39 per arc 
 light, making a total cost of operation that year, aside from interest, 
 $172,904.13. This, together with interest on the entire investment at 
 4%, makes a total cost per arc light, $62.83 per annum. 
 
 The Lighting Commission of Syracuse, New York, which visited 
 Detroit during the summer of 1907 and investigated the plant in detail, 
 reported, in part, as follows: 
 
 “Your Commission formed the impression that the Detroit plant is 
 well managed and found evidence that the service rendered is satis- 
 factory. Testimony of citizens not identified with the management of 
 the plant and our own observations of conditions in the central portion 
 of the city indicate that the streets of the city of Detroit are fairly 
 well lighted.” 
 
 “The report of the Detroit Public Lighting Commission is particu- 
 larly complete and explicit, but there are certain features of the accounts, 
 which, in the judgment of your Commission, should be modified. The 
 most important of these is the matter of depreciation. The total in- 
 vestment for the entire plant is given as $1,192,508.98. Depreciation for 
 the year ending June 30, 1906, is given as follows: 
 
24 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 Depreciation on discarded equipment $ 9,025.25 
 
 Depreciation on the present entire investment value of $930,557.99 
 
 at an average of 3 per cent 27,916.74 
 
 “The discrepancy between the total investment and the amount on 
 which depreciation is charged for the year ending June 30, 1906, is 
 presumably due to discarded equipment previously charged off. It ap- 
 pears, however, that an average depreciation of only 3 per centum is 
 altogether too low for such a plant, notwithstanding that land and 
 conduits are included in this depreciation.” 
 
 “The following assumed depreciation rates are believed to be quite 
 conservative and are probably low, all things considered, but we assign 
 
 them as fairly reasonable. 
 
 The values 
 
 are those of the 
 
 total invest- 
 
 ment to June 30, 1906. 
 
 Conduits 
 
 Total 
 
 Investment. 
 
 $ 128,217.69 
 
 Assumed Rate 
 Depreciation. 
 
 2% 
 
 Amount of 
 Depreciation 
 
 $ 2,564.35 
 
 Cables 
 
 95,548.53 
 
 5 
 
 4,777.43 
 
 Real estate (land) 
 
 64,377.12 
 
 0 
 
 
 Building and wharf 
 
 . 114,337.24 
 
 3 
 
 3,430.11 
 
 Lines and poles 
 
 . 237,335.39 
 
 7 
 
 16,613.48 
 
 Towers and lamp posts. . . . , 
 
 . 109,948.65 
 
 5 
 
 5,497.43 
 
 Electric plant, incandescent, 
 
 37,648.07 
 
 10 
 
 3,764.81 
 
 Electric plant, arc 
 
 93,797.15 
 
 10 
 
 9,379.71 
 
 Steam plant 
 
 158,620.13 
 
 8 
 
 12,689.61 
 
 Railway track and scales.. 
 
 10,982.31 
 
 5 
 
 549.11 
 
 Machine shop 
 
 8,226.27 
 
 10 
 
 822.63 
 
 Arc lamps and switches .... 
 
 . 100,596.01 
 
 10 
 
 10,059.60 
 
 Belle Isle Plant 
 
 32,874.42 
 
 10 
 
 3,287.44 
 
 Total 
 
 .$1,192,508.98 
 
 
 $73,435.71 
 
 “This depreciation is equivalent to over 6.15 per cent of the total 
 investment of $1,192,508.98. The depreciation at this rate upon the 
 investment, as per the official report, for the year ending June 30, 1906, 
 or upon $930,557.99, would be $57,346.56, or $29,429.82 in excess of the 
 depreciation as computed would be $57,346.82 in excess of the deprecia- 
 tion as computed on the three per cent basis. Apportioning this addi- 
 tional depreciation between arc and incandescent in the same ratio as 
 total cost is apportioned in the Detroit report, the additional deprecia- 
 tion chargeable to arc lighting becomes $23,605.00. The average number 
 of arc lights operated during the year was 3,080; therefore, this additional 
 depreciation would add $7.67 per arc lamp per year; raising the gross 
 figure from $54.39 to $62.06 per lamp per year.” 
 
 “With a reasonable charge for legal services, rebates which might be 
 obtained from a contracting corporation for interruption of service, over- 
 head expense and various other items which, in an ordinary commercial 
 enterprise would be charged against the business, the gross cost per 
 arc lamp per year would be considerably higher than this amount.” 
 
 “Considering the fact that Detroit has more than twice the popula- 
 tion of Syracuse and that it has more than twice the number of arc 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 25 
 
 lamps in street service, that coal is somewhat cheaper in Detroit, that 
 the total number of hours scheduled per lamp is somewhat less than 
 Syracuse and that the Detroit management is fully as efficient as could 
 be reasonably expected in Syracuse, the above analysis dobs not indi- 
 cate that Syracuse could now secure cheaper lighting for its streets 
 from a municipal plant than under its existing contract rates.” 
 
 Cost in Other Cities 
 
 Leaving out of account any additional items which the Syracuse 
 
 Commission 
 
 claims should 
 
 be included 
 
 in the 
 
 Detroit cost. 
 
 it is inter- 
 
 esting to compare the rates 
 
 of the city 
 
 of Detroit under municipal own- 
 
 ership with 
 
 tne rates paid 
 
 by some 
 
 of the 
 
 larger cities. 
 
 particularly 
 
 those in the 
 
 same section of the country. 
 
 
 
 
 
 ARC LAMPS. 
 
 
 incandescent lamps. 
 
 CITIES. 
 
 Number. 
 
 Cost per Yr. 
 
 Watts 
 
 Number. 
 
 Cost 
 
 
 
 per .Lamp. 
 
 per Lamp. 
 
 
 per Year. 
 
 New York . . 
 
 . . . 13,972 
 
 $ 90.00 
 
 325 
 
 4,588 
 
 $22.50 
 
 
 
 100.00 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 Philadelphia 
 
 . . . 11,414 
 
 99. GU 
 
 480 
 
 2,346 
 
 .07y 2 kw. 
 
 St. Louis.... 
 
 . . . 1,15U 
 
 97.50 
 
 285 
 
 4,500 
 
 19.05 
 
 Hoston 
 
 . . . 3,781 
 
 124.10 
 
 480 
 
 
 
 Cleveland . . 
 
 . . . 1,757 
 
 G7.92 
 
 
 
 
 Buffalo 
 
 . . . 2,85(5 
 
 *5G.OO 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 
 
 **75.00 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 Cincinnati . 
 
 .... 5,522 
 
 *G0.00 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 
 
 **72.00 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 Baltimore . . 
 
 . . . 1,949 
 
 G7.49 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 rittsburg ... 
 
 .... 3,279 
 
 70.00 
 
 
 
 27.50 
 
 Wasnington 
 
 . . . 1,121 
 
 85.00 
 
 500 
 
 1,073 
 
 20.00 
 
 .Detroit 
 
 . . . 3,374 
 
 G2.83 
 
 
 14,590 
 
 
 ^Overhead. 
 
 ** Underground. 
 
 City engineer Edwin A. Fisher of Rochester, New York, found that 
 the average cost of arc lights in 29 cities witn over 100,000 innaoitants 
 is $8(5.18 per lamp per year. 
 
 The consideration of the question, “will municipal lighting pay,” 
 and an appeal to the actual experience of cities which have operated 
 municipal plants and whose conditions are comparable to those of St. 
 Louis, furnishes no satisfactory answer to the question. Detroit has 
 succeeded in reducing the cost considerably below the average paid by 
 the first twenty-nine cities in America but not so iow as some. 
 
 Chicago, under the most favorable interpretation of the figures, was 
 able in 1905, to produce arc lights for $85.49 per year, which was 69 
 cents less than the above average, but considerably more than the 
 contract prices paid by Cleveland, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Baltimore and 
 Pittsburg. 
 
 The opinion of the committee is that, judging from the results of 
 the experience of these two cities, the question, “will municipal lighting 
 pay,” cannot be answered in the affirmative. 
 
 The committee requested two of its members, Prof. Langsdorf and 
 Mr. Lichter, both electrical engineers, and well acquainted with the engi- 
 neering problems involved, to furnish estimates on the cost of con- 
 struction and operation of a municipal lighting plant for St. Louis. 
 Their report is embodied in the following section. 
 
26 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 A Municipal Lighting Plant 
 
 Cost of Construction and Operation. 
 
 At the present time the lighting of the city of St. Louis is done partly 
 by contract and partly by the city itself, the contract lighting, however, 
 constituting by far the larger amount of the total. The distribution of 
 lighting between the two systems is shown by the following table: 
 
 Contract Lighting. 
 
 Street arc lamps (about) 1,150 
 
 Alley incandescent lamps (about) . . 800 
 
 Public buildings, 16 c. p. incandescent 3,800 
 
 Gas mantle lamps (about) 18,000 
 
 Municipal Lighting. 
 
 Equivalent load of 16 c. p. incandescent lamps 13,216 
 
 The power for the municipal lighting is supplied by four plants lo- 
 cated, respectively, at the Water Works, the Insane Asylum, the new City 
 Hospital, and the New City Hall. These plants have, respectively, equiv- 
 alent connected loads of 1698, 2195, 1400 and 7923 16 c. p. incandescent 
 lamps. Estimating 50 watts per lamp, these figures represent a total con- 
 nected load of 661 kilowatts, or an equivalent station load of 750 kw., 
 assuming an efficiency of 85 per cent. But inasmuch as the total con- 
 nected load is made up of both lamps and motors, the actual station load 
 will never be as great as this figure, and it is probable that the maximum 
 load at any one time will never exceed 300 kw., or 40 per cent of the con- 
 nected load. 
 
 The great bulk of the city lighting is required for the streets and 
 alleys, parks and public places. It is this lighting, together with that of 
 some of the public buildings (mainly police and fire department stations) 
 that is now supplied by contract, and it is effected by electricity and gas. 
 The “electric” district is bounded on the west by Jefferson Avenue, from 
 Cass Avenue to Chouteau Avenue, and extends northwardly east of 
 Eleventh Street to Bremen Avenue and southwardly east of Seventh Street 
 to Arsenal Street; within this district the streets are lighted by arc lamps 
 and the alleys by 32 c. p. incandescent lamps. The remainder of the city, 
 north and south of Keokuk Street, is lighted by gas mantle lamps. 
 
 A Choice of Three Systems 
 
 In determining upon a system of lighting for the entire city it be- 
 comes a question whether the lighting shall be done wholly by electricity 
 or by electricity and gas in combination. And in either case, whether 
 resort shall be had to a municipal plant, an exclusive contract system, 
 or a mixture of the two. It is obviously absurd to contemplate a municipal 
 gas plant for street lighting alone; and it is likewise unnecessary for the 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 27 
 
 present purpose to consider the case of gas lighting by contract and electric 
 lighting by a municipal plant, for the reason that such an electrical 
 plant would he too small. (In this connection it may be pointed out that 
 the contract price for gas lighting is at the present time in the neigh- 
 borhood of 70 or 75 per cent of the total.) Hence the above alternatives 
 reduce to the following: 
 
 (1) Contract system, electric lighting only. 
 
 (2) Contract system, electricity and gas in combination. 
 
 (3) Municipal plant, electric lighting only. 
 
 It is the opinion of the committee that, under existing conditions, 
 either the first or the second of these three alternatives is preferable to 
 the third, provided, of course, that a contract can be drawn with prop- 
 erly safeguarded conditions and at a reasonable price. While it is true 
 that the public service corporations now in the field have a practical 
 monopoly, it is still true that they possess adequate equipment for the 
 required service, and that they can profitably undertake the work at a 
 price at least as low as a municipal plant could meet. Again, it is possible 
 that the city, if it were to build a municipal plant, could not secure per- 
 mission to use existing conduits and pole lines, so that an unsightly multi- 
 plication of pole lines and wires would result in the districts where such 
 unsightliness is least desirable. In addition, an electrical plant for street 
 illumination only (or for the greater part) can not be operated econom- 
 ically on the basis of cost per kilowatt hour, because such a plant is 
 under full load for less than half the time, and is practically idle during 
 the remaining time. The fixed charges, however, run on all the time, so 
 that when they are distributed over the working time they are somewhat 
 more than twice as great as in a plant operating 24 hours per day. 
 This increased cost per kilowatt hour is somewhat reduced by reason of 
 the fact that a lighting plant for street illumination is running under 
 conditions of maximum efficiency when actually in use, so that the actual 
 operating cost is less tnan in a plant having a smaller “load factor,” that 
 is, furnishing a continuous but fluctuating service. The only remedy for 
 this defect of discontinuous load is to secure a “day load” for the munici- 
 pal plant, and this can only be done by entering the field in competition 
 with private companies. 
 
 Estimated Cost of Construction 
 
 It is, nevertheless, desirable to know the probable cost of construct- 
 ing and operating a municipal plant for the sake of comparison with the 
 present cost to the city as fixed by contracts now in force. This matter 
 has been carefully investigated by Mr. Thomas B. Carter, formerly Super- 
 visor of City Lighting, and by Messrs. Holman and Laird, consulting 
 engineers. Mr. Carter’s report was submitted to the Board of Public Im- 
 provements on November 27, 1906, and that of Messrs. Holman and Laird 
 on March 30, 1907. The latter report is in the nature of a review of the 
 former. The estimates of total cost as published in the two reports are 
 practically the same, that of Mr. Carter being $2,523,200, and Holman and 
 Laird’s $2,552,000. Both estimates are based on a system of arc and incan- 
 
28 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 descent lighting; arc lamps for the streets and incandescent lamps for the 
 alleys, parks and public buildings. The type of arc light recommended is 
 the 7.5 ampere series enclosed alternating lamp, taking 480 watts at the arc, 
 and 80 c. p. series incandescent lamps for the alleys. The average spacing 
 of the arc lamps is figured at 400 feet, and that of the alley lamps at 300 
 feet. According to Messrs. Holman and Laird, the former are to be dis- 
 tributed over 600 miles of the total 900 miles of streets and the latter 
 over 200 miles of the 350 miles of alleys. This allows for the probable 
 extensions of street and alley improvements for a few years to come, as 
 well as of considerably more lighting than is now done, and these 
 spacings conform to average practice. The total number of street lamps 
 is therefore — 
 
 Arcs, 400 feet apart, 13.2 per mile, 600 miles 7,920 
 
 Incandescents (30 c. p.), 300 feet apart, 17.6 per mile, 200 miles 3,520 
 
 Allowing in addition 2,000 30 c. p. lamps for parks and public places 
 and 20,000 16 c. p. incandescent lamps for buildings (instead of the 
 present 17,000), the total connected load “at the lamps’’ will be — 
 
 7,920 arcs, taking 500 watts each 3,960 kw. 
 
 5,520 30 c. p. lamps, taking 81 watts each 447 “ 
 
 20,000 16 c. p. lamps, taking 50 watts each 1,000 “ 
 
 Total 5,407 
 
 The actual maximum working load will, however, be less than this, 
 on account of the fact that the building load will never be on in full 
 when the street lamps are running — i. e., at night. The actual maximum 
 load at the lamps may be estimated by assuming that the maximum 
 building load will be 25 per cent of the connected load, or 250 kw. Hence 
 the maximum load at the lamps is — 
 
 7,920 arcs 3,960 kw. 
 
 5,520 30 c. p. incandescents 447 “ 
 
 20,000 16 c. p. incandescents 250 “ 
 
 4,657 “ 
 
 Assuming an average efficiency of distribution of 82 per cent, the 
 station load will then be 5,680 kw., or with reserve allowance, say 6,000 kw. 
 This margin is, however, somewhat small for the reason that the plant 
 would be carrying a practically steady load and would therefore be de- 
 signed with a few large generating units rather than a multiplicity of 
 small ones; a breakdown of one unit would, therefore, be fatal to con- 
 tinuous service unless the station capacity were made about 7,000 kw. 
 
 Since the estimates of Mr. Carter were made, additional improvements 
 in the “underground” district have been made, and more are about to be 
 started. It is probable, therefore, that his estimate of $275,000 for conduits 
 (raised to $285,000 by Messrs. Holman and Laird) is too low. Probably 
 a safe estimate of the total cost, including the increased cost of 1,000 kw. 
 additional equipment, would be $2,750,000. 
 
 It has been assumed by the committee that the detailed estimates of 
 costs of circuits, lamps, buildings, etc., as determined in the reports above 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 29 
 
 referred to are correct. It is needless to say that a complete estimate on 
 our part would involve an amount of work out of all proportion to the 
 value of the result, and even were such work undertaken it could not 
 be pushed to completion without having at hand all data concerning 
 routes of pole lines, conduits, etc., in the possession of city officials. 
 
 Estimated Cost of Operation 
 
 The present time is an awkward one for deciding upon the particular 
 types of electric lamps to be recommended. The art of electric lighting is 
 at present in a state of exceedingly rapid development, and it is not un- 
 likely that the advances of the next year will render obsolete types of 
 lamps now in common use. Several types of “luminous” or “flaming” 
 arc lamps, of much higher efficiency than the carbon arc, and giving a 
 better distribution of lignt than the latter, are already on the market; 
 difficulties have arisen in their operation, but it is altogether probable 
 that they will be successfully overcome as experience accumulates. Some 
 of these luminous arcs are in use, but data as to their operation are not 
 obtainable. Similarly, the advent of the tungsten and other metallic 
 filament lamps promise a much more economical small unit of light. The 
 so-called “metallized” filament lamp has been here figured upon; it 
 consumes 2.7 watts per c. p. instead of 3.5 as in the old style carbon 
 lamps. The tungsten lamp for series street lighting has a specific 
 consumption of something over one watt per candle, or about twice the 
 efficiency of the metallized filament lamp, but there is little data con- 
 cerning its actual performance in such service. 
 
 With regard to a possible choice between direct and alternating 
 current arc lamps, the latter are thought to be preferable. The direct 
 current arc has the characteristic of throwing its strongest light down- 
 ward at an angle of about 45 degrees with the horizontal, though this 
 is modified by the enclosing globes. The alternating current lamp throws 
 a much larger part of the light in the horizontal direction, and is, there- 
 fore, better suited for securing uniform illumination. 
 
 The cost of operating the lamps may be estimated as follows, assuming 
 the use of 7.5 ampere series arc lamps consuming 500 watts each, and 
 of 30 c. p. series incandescent lamps taking 81 watts each. 
 
 Assuming an efficiency of distribution ot 80 per cent for the arcs 
 and series incandescent lamps, the total station output will be — 
 
 Kw. Hours. 
 
 7,920 arcs, 500 watts each, 4,100 hours per year 20,300,000 
 
 5,520 incandescents (30 c. p.), 81 watts each, 4,100 hours per year 2,040,000 
 20,000 incandescents (16 c. p.), 50 watts each, 4,100 hours per year 1,600,000 
 
 Total 23,940,000 
 
 or, approximately, 25,000,000 kw.-hours per annum. 
 
 In a plant of this size, conveniently located for the delivery of coal 
 and for obtaining an adequate water supply, it should be possible to 
 produce power at a cost of 0.6 cents per kw.-hour at the switchboard, 
 resulting in an annual operating cost of — 
 
 25,000,000x.006 $150,000 
 
30 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 Allowing interest at the rate of 4 per cent, and depreciation at 8 per 
 cent, the fixed annual charge due to these items will be (on an invest- 
 ment of $2,750,000: 
 
 2,750,000x.l2 $330,000 
 
 Administration, expenses of distribution, insurance and repairs will 
 add approximately $125,000 more, so that the total annual cost will be 
 about $605,000, or at the rate of 2.42 cents per kw. hour. It will probably 
 be safer to put this figure at 2 y 2 cents per kw. hour. 
 
 The cost per arc per annum is then, assuming 80 per cent efficiency, 
 500 watts at the lamp— f-. 80 x hours at 2 y 2 cents per kw.-hour $64.06 
 
 Carbons, trimming, cleaning, etc 5.00 
 
 Total $69.06 
 
 The cost for a 30 c. p. incandescent lamp, taking 81 watts at the 
 lamp, is: 
 
 .UxH%%x .025 $10.38 
 
 Renewals, maintenance, repairs, etc. (about) 6.00 
 
 $16.38 
 
 The present cost of arc lighting is at the rate of $23.77 per 1000 lamp 
 hours, or approximately $97.50 per lamp per annum; the rate for incan- 
 descent alley lamps is $4.79 per 1000 lamp hours, or approximately $19.65 
 per lamp per annum. It must be considered in connection with the 
 figures for arc lamps that the estimate of $69.06 is for a 7.5 ampere 
 lamp (consuming 480 watts at the arc), while the contract price of 
 $97.50 is for a 4.4 ampere lamp (consuming about 285 watts at the arc). 
 
 Lighting in Residential Districts 
 
 If the present system of using gas and electricity be retained, there 
 is little doubt that the average intensity of illuminating in the resi- 
 dential districts should be increased. Strangers in the city often com- 
 ment on the dimness of our street lighting. The lamps serve more as 
 markers along the way than as a means of securing protection from 
 nigiit prowlers. In many places the average illumination is low, and the 
 minimum is very low, falling to 0.01 foot-candles or less. (A foot-candle 
 is the intensity of light due to a standard candle at a distance of one foot). 
 To afford the equivalent of even dim moonlight the intensity should be 
 at least twice this figure; a minimum of 0.01 foot-candle can be obtained 
 by placing common candles along the curb about 25 feet apart. A proper 
 minimum is at least 0.03 foot-candles. 
 
 Gas lighting as against arc lighting of residence districts has the 
 advantage that the units of light are smaller and can be more closely 
 spaced, thereby giving a better average distribution of light — the intensity 
 of the units being relatively small, they can be placed low so as to avoid 
 
High Electric Lamps — Gas Lamps Under Trees — A Suggestion for Residential Districts. 
 
32 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 producing the heavy shadows cast by trees as in the case of arc lamps. 
 But the present cost per gas mantle lamp, about $27.00 per year, is much 
 too high. As an illustration of the amount of the excess, the experience 
 of the city of Cleveland may be cited which in 1904 undertook the oper- 
 ation of its gas lamps, paying the gas company at the rate of 75 cents 
 per 1000 cubic feet of gas consumed. The cost per lamp per year was then 
 reduced from $22 (the original contract price) to $12.56 in 1904, $13.44 
 in 1905, and $13.17 in 1906. The lamps in this case were of the Wels- 
 bach incandescent type giving about 55 candle-power, on substantially 
 the same as those in use in St. Louis. Each of these lamps consumes gas 
 at the rate of about 3 cubic feet per hour, and is in operation 4,150 hours 
 per year, representing an annual consumption of 12,450 cubic feet, which 
 at the rate of $1.00 per thousand, represents a value of $12.45; main- 
 tenance charges, including supplies, extinguishing, lighting, etc., will 
 amount to from $6.75 to $7.00 per annum; so that the total is between 
 $19.20 ana $19.45. The charge to the city for the operation of such a 
 lamp should not exceed $20.00 per year. 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 33 
 
 Three Solutions 
 
 Municipal Ownership, Competition or Regulation. 
 
 The estimates in the preceding paragraphs show conclusively that a 
 municipal plant, if constructed and operated economically, would light 
 the streets, public grounds and buildings of the city, at a cost per lamp 
 per year considerably below the present contract price. But this is 
 assuming that the plant would be managed and operated with the same 
 degree of skill as is a private plant. In view of the fact, however, that 
 our city has not yet definitely adopted the policy of appointing men to 
 office because of their fitness for the particular position, that skilled 
 service and long tenure of office are the exception rather than the rule, 
 and that the experience of other cities goes to show that municipalities 
 almost invariably pay more for supplies than do private companies, the 
 city, we believe, can hardly expect to furnish its own light at the price 
 indicated in the three estimates of Mr. Carter, Messrs. Holman and Laird, 
 and Messrs. Langsdorf and Lichter. 
 
 The present price, $97.50, which the city is paying for arc lamps, is 
 too high as is shown by the figures above quoted and is impliedly admitted 
 in the statement of the manager of the Union Electric Company to the 
 Mayor, in which he says that the company can furnish equivalent lights 
 in the future at a considerably lower price than the city is now paying. 
 
 Competition Not the Solution 
 
 It has been suggested and strongly advocated that the only way to 
 secure the lowest price for public lighting is to open the field to com- 
 petition. We are of the opinion that it is wholly inadvisable to grant at 
 this time a franchise to another lighting company for the purpose of 
 reducing the cost of lighting by competition. As was pointed out in the 
 opening paragraphs, street lighting is a function which can not be regu- 
 lated to the best interests of the city by competition. The cost of dupli- 
 cating the equipment, the damage to the streets, the disposition toward 
 over-capitalization on the part of the franchise-holding corporations, 
 makes competition costly, and this added expense, must be paid for out 
 of the taxes paid by the people. Furthermore, the almost inevitable 
 tendency of competing companies in this form of public service to merge, 
 as has been the experience in this city, indicate that competition will not 
 permanently solve the lighting question. The only competitor which 
 should be permitted in the field is the city itself, and the municipality 
 shoulu not enter the field until it has thoroughly tested its power to 
 regulate and control this public utility. 
 
 Ample Power to Regulate 
 
 Under the Enabling Act passed by the Legislature in May, 1907, the 
 city has full power and authority to determine and fix a reasonable 
 rate for lighting both by electricity and gas, and the statute gives the 
 city the right to examine the books of existing corporations for the 
 
34 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 purpose of ascertaining what is a reasonable rate. The main provisions 
 of the act, as far as relates to street lighting, are: 
 
 “Any * * corporation * * engaged in furnishing gas, steam, or 
 
 electricity under franchises granted by the state or any of the cities 
 thereof * * is hereby required to charge no more for the services of 
 
 such utilities than such rates as shall be fixed from time to time, by 
 ordinance * * and all cities * * are hereby granted power and 
 
 authority to fix the rates * * and to provide and enforce fines and 
 
 penalties for the violation thereof, and to change the rates, by ordinance, 
 from time to time, as often as may be deemed necessary: Provided, how- 
 ever, that such rates must be reasonable and shall not be changed oftener 
 than once every two years.” 
 
 “Any such city * * may, by ordinance, provide for and establish 
 
 a committee or a commission to make investigation into all facts and 
 matter touching the establishing of such just and reasonable rates of 
 charges, * * to require and enforce the production of books and 
 
 papers, and to compel the attendance of witnesses.” 
 
 Under the provisions of this law the city can, by ordinance, provide 
 for the appointment of a commission to make the necessary investigations 
 to determine what is a reasonable rate. If the regulations under this 
 law prove ineffective in securing reasonable terms to the city, then the 
 only recourse is a municipal plant. But municipal operation should not 
 be undertaken until the power to regulate and control has been thoroughly 
 tested. 
 
 Short Term Contract and Metered Service 
 
 If the city succeeds in securing reasonable rates for the lighting of 
 the streets, the contract should not be made for a long term of years. 
 While a long term contract might make possible a slightly lower rate 
 for a few years, it is sure to prove unprofitable to the city in the long run. 
 The art of electric lighting both as concerns the generation and receiving 
 equipment is m a state of exceedingly rapid development, so that the 
 cost of producing the light is being greatly reduced. This increased 
 economy in generating power coupled with the advance in the efficiency 
 of electric lamps, both arc and incandescent, have reduced the cost of 
 commercial lighting in the past ten years fully 40 per cent; and these reduc- 
 tions are only indications of further economies in the near future, some 
 of which are already in sight. 
 
 The city can not reap the advantage of these new methods, these 
 advances in the efficiency of electric lamps, and the new inventions that 
 are sure to be made in the next decade if a long-term contract, calling 
 for a certain type and make of lamps, and of a specified candle power, 
 is entered into with a private corporation. 
 
 Furthermore, metered service should be provided for in any contract. 
 It will permit a change to a more efficient type of lamp (when proved 
 desirable) without necessitating a new contract to cover new conditions 
 of current supply and will prevent the usual loss to the city through the 
 arbitrary and very uncertain “candle-power” rating. This metering of 
 electric current is now frequently done by public lighting companies for 
 their own information. It is a practical proposition, as has been proven 
 in Boston which has for a number of years required such measurements. 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 35 
 
 Illumination and Street Fixtures 
 
 In view of the recent agitation for better illumination in the down- 
 town district of this city and the general movement in American cities 
 not only for better lighting but for ornamental poles and electroliers, your 
 committee deemed it wise to add to this report some of the suggestions 
 along this line which have come to them in the course of this in- 
 vestigation. 
 
 The need for more brilliant illumination of our business streets is 
 admitted by all, and no one denies that well lighted streets distinctly affect 
 the social and moral conditions in a city. It has been said that one 
 street lamp is as effective as five policemen. Social workers in the 
 crowded sections of the city bear testimony to the fact that filth and 
 
 Unnecessary Duplication of Poles. 
 
 immorality decrease as the amount of light increases, and that well 
 lighted streets improve the moral tone of even the most vicious neigh- 
 borhoods. 
 
Electroliers on South Broadway, Los Angeles. 
 
Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 37 
 
 Furthermore, a well lighted business district makes a city attractive 
 not only to residents out also to strangers and travelers. No form of 
 improvement leaves a more favorable impression on the visitor than the 
 bright, cheerful glare of many street lights. American cities are beginning 
 to appreciate this and in some of them a well defined and uniform system 
 has been adopted, insuring not only plenty of illumination at night but 
 ornamental poles and electroliers which will add to the appearance of the 
 street during the day. 
 
 Artistic Lighting in Los Angeles 
 
 Los Angeles, Cal., one of the first cities to give special attention to 
 this feature of improvement, has put into operation a uniform style over 
 5.8 miles of its streets. The city electrician, Mr. R. H. Manahan, thus 
 describes it: 
 
 “The first lighting by incandescnet lamps on ornamental posts in our 
 business streets was taken up by tne merchants and property owners on 
 Broadway, working under their organization known as the Broadway 
 Improvement Association. The Association, by means of subscriptions 
 from property owners and merchants along the street, raised funds for 
 installing 135 cast-iron ornamental posts. These posts are located at 
 about 120-foot intervals along each side of the street and originally 
 contained an aggregate of 384 candle-power in twelve 32 candle-power 
 incandescent lamps. This would be equivalent to nearly thirty-seven 450- 
 watt arc lamps per block, there being twelve posts per block on this 
 particular street.” 
 
 “The cost of lighting these posts was assumed by the city, and, as 
 one can readily see from the above comparison, was a very expensive 
 method when considered apart from its advertising and artistic features; 
 and, in view of other streets asking for the same improvement, the 
 experiment was tried on reducing the aggregate candle-power one-half, 
 with very satisfactory results both financially and from the standpoint of 
 illumination, the general effect looking down the street being practically 
 the same.” 
 
 “Owing to the difficulty which the Broadway Association had in 
 securing subscriptions from all the property owners on the street, an 
 act was passed at the next session of the State Legislature enabling 
 property owners along any street to institute proceedings for improvement 
 of this character. Upon favorable action by the City Council an assess- 
 ment was formed, upon which the cost of the improvement was levied 
 in the same manner as is done in ordinary street improvement work. 
 The three other principal streets upon which ornamental posts are now 
 installed used the assessment method, and it has been very satisfactory in 
 operation. 
 
 “We have two general types of posts, the four-arm and the six-arm, 
 with 16-inch and 18-inch top globes. The six-arm post is the one adopted 
 by the Broadway Association, and the present arrangement of lamps con- 
 sists of three 32 candle-power lamps in the 18-inch top globes and one 
 16 candle-power lamp in each of the 8-inch enclosing frosted globes. The 
 
tDouble Arc Light Post — Detroit. tDouble Arc Light Post — Rochester, N. Y. *Double Arc Light Post — New York 
 
fArc Light Post — Hamilton Fish Park, New York. *Electrolier — Fifth Avenue, New York. *Single Arc Light Post New York. 
 
 ^Courtesy of J. L. Mott Iron Works, N. Y. fCourtesy of Municipal Journal and Engineer 
 
40 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 four-arm post used on the other streets contains three 8 candle-power 
 lamps in each 12-inch globe on the arms and three 32 candle-power lamps 
 in the 16-inch top globe. 
 
 “Provision has been made on the later posts, erected for extra circuit 
 wires, so that they may be used for decorative lights strung along or 
 across the streets. The connections to these posts were installed by the 
 respective lighting companies at their own cost; having underground 
 conduits already in the street, they simply ran the necessary service wires 
 from their manholes to the posts at a nominal expense. 
 
 “Lighting hours for these posts vary according to conditions. On 
 the main business streets all posts are lighted until midnight, and after 
 midnight two posts at each street intersection. In the semi-residence sec- 
 tion, all posts are lighted until 10 o’clock and the balance until 12 or later, 
 as desired by the property owners. 
 
 “In the following tabulated form I have shown the extent and 
 original cost of installing the posts, including globes and necessary 
 wires to the base of the post, at which point the lighting companies 
 connect their service wires; also the total cost and cost per front foot for 
 current for one year: 
 
 ORNAMENTAL POSTS. 
 
 Street ^ 
 
 Hill, 8,445 
 
 Broadway, 7,125 
 Spring, 5,750 
 
 Main, 9,420 
 
 No. of 
 Posts. 
 
 164 
 
 135 
 
 132 
 
 163 
 
 Candle Pow- Total Candle 
 er per Post. Power. 
 
 192 31,500 
 
 192 25,900 
 
 192 25,300 
 
 192 31,300 
 
 Cost of In- 
 stallation. 
 
 $17,294.00 
 
 14.000. 00 
 14,628.00 
 
 19.000. 00 
 
 Cost per 
 Front Foot. 
 
 $0.94 
 
 1.00 
 
 1.06 
 
 1.10 
 
 Cost per 
 Post. 
 
 $105.25 
 
 103.00 
 
 110.00 
 116.00 
 
 Totals, 
 
 5.8 miles 
 
 , 594 
 
 192 114,000 
 
 $64,922.00 
 
 
 
 
 COST 
 
 OF LIGHTING OF ORNAMENTAL 
 
 POSTS. 
 
 
 Street. 
 
 
 
 Rate per K. W. Hour. 
 
 Yearly Cost. 
 
 Cost per Front Foot. 
 
 Hill 
 
 
 
 . . . . 3% cts. 
 
 $ 9,200.00 
 
 
 $0.50 
 
 Broadway 
 
 
 . ... 3 % “ 
 
 7,780.00 
 
 
 .556 
 
 Spring . 
 
 
 
 . ... 3% “ 
 
 7,625.00 
 
 
 .65 
 
 Main . . . 
 
 
 
 .... 3% “ 
 
 9,810.00 
 
 
 .568 
 
 Totals 
 
 
 .... 33/ 4 “ 
 
 $31,562.50 
 
 
 
 “The entire maintenance of the posts is made a part of the company’s 
 contract, this including all necessary repairs to wiring, broken globes 
 and renewal of lamps and necessary cleaning and washing of the enclosed 
 frosted globes.” 
 
 St. Paul 
 
 St. Paul, Minn., has adopted a similar post for her main business 
 street. The St. Paul Gas Light Company took the initiative — worked up 
 an interest among business men and induced the property owners to 
 furnish the electrolier, and the tenant to pay for the light. Sixty-five 
 
Combination Light and Trolley Pole — Frankfort, Germany. Electrolier in Market Place — Dresden, Germany. Electrolier — St. Paul. 
 
42 
 
 Street Lighting in St. Louis. 
 
 posts have been erected and fifty-four more contracted for. The cost per 
 standard installed and ready for lighting is $100.00. The total cost of 
 maintenance and lighting is approximately $100 per post per year, the 
 company charging five cents per kw. hour. This uniform system with 
 posts 100 feet apart has added much to the appearance of the street with- 
 out seriously detracting from window displays. 
 
 Other Cities 
 
 The same style of post has been installed by a few of the merchants 
 on Washington Avenue, St. Louis. 
 
 Denver has worked out a uniform system for Sixteenth Street along 
 a somewhat different line. Here the standards are designed to serve not 
 only for ornamental light posts but also as support for trolley wires and 
 feed wires. The poles are placed about 90 feet apart, on each side of the 
 street. The lamps are alternating current enclosed arcs of 110 volts, 6.6 
 amperes in opal globes; the outer one only being used so as to present 
 a single line vista down the street. Eleven blocks are thus lighted by 
 the Denver Gas & Electric Company at a uniform cost of $60 per lamp. 
 The expense is borne by the city. The total cost of equipping the street 
 was approximately $16,000. The system has proven to be so satisfactory 
 that the merchants on other down-town streets are urging the city to 
 extend the new lighting scheme to other principal streets. 
 
 Rochester, New York, has effected a similar combination of electric 
 light and trolley pole. Main Street, with its ornamental posts about 100 
 feet apart, makes a very brilliant and attractive appearance at night. 
 
 D. H. Burnham, the well-known architect, has prepared a design for 
 Market Street, San Francisco, which also serves for both the trolley pole 
 and the lamp standard. The design is somewhat similar to the posts 
 in the center of some of the Paris boulevards, except that the poles will 
 be necessarily much higher in order to serve as trolley poles. 
 
 The difficulty with the combination post of the San Francisco type 
 is that it throws the light so high above the street as to be of little effect. 
 Denver has avoided this by placing the lights lower down on brackets. 
 Most of the European cities use the tall standards for the electric lights, 
 but have in addition the gas lamps along the curb under the trees. 
 This combination of gas and electric lights is especially desirable in 
 residential districts. Some of the continental cities obviate the necessity 
 of trolley poles on business streets by attaching the trolley wires to 
 adjoining buildings. Feed wires are uniformly placed underground. 
 
 We are convinced that the time has come when St. Louis should 
 adopt a comprehensive and uniform system for lighting her business 
 streets. Whatever design of standard is adopted — whether the com- 
 bination trolley and light pole or the electrolier with incandescent 
 clusters — it should be more artistic than the present standards; it should 
 be uniform for all of the main business streets and the lights should be 
 frequent enough to furnish illumination sufficient to make the business 
 section of the city attractive at night. Efficient and artistic illumination 
 is a commercial asset of considerable importance to any city. 
 
Sixteenth Street, Denver — Electric Light and Trolley Post Combined 
 
Designed for 
 Market Street, 
 San Francisco. 
 Trolley and 
 Lamp Post 
 Combined.