From PUF in early 1929
Three interesting pieces from some of the first issues of Public Utilities Fortnightly of January and February 1929:
Gas theft by plumber
The Greensboro Gas Company somehow or other became suspicious that the premises of a certain plumber was consuming more gas than was recorded by meter. The company investigated and claimed that it found additional piping hidden in the walls for the purpose of conducting gas into the premises without meter registration. There was also conflicting evidence as to whether the plumber’s house was equipped to use coal and electricity as well as gas for heat and light.
Thereupon the company discontinued service and removed its meter, claiming that approximately $70 was due for unrecorded gas. Shortly after this the premises was destroyed by fire, together with any incriminating evidence, if any. The individual was indicted in the criminal court and acquitted on the charge but was required to pay the cost of prosecution. Thereafter he brought complaint before the Commission for resumption of service. Not withstanding the acquittal, it was the opinion of the Pennsylvania Commission that the company had good reason to believe that there was a theft of gas on the premises and was not unjustified in refusing to resume service until the $70 were paid.
Macintosh v, Greensboro Gas Co. Complaint Docket No. 7717
When reductions in rates bring criticism
Changes in utility rates, either upward or downward, seem to be unpopular with a large portion of the rate payers.
Even when utility companies offer to reduce their rates they may soon be the object of attack. In scores of cities and towns throughout the country during the last few months proposals to revise gas and electric schedules downward have been made by the companies, and the reaction to these announcements are often far from favorable. Newspaper headings tell the stories from day to day in some such way as this: “Rate production only for large consumers,” or “Small consumers hit by new rates,” or “New rate hit by head of Consumers’ League,” or “Cities are up in arms in defense of the small gas users.”
Public officials often rush into print with some such statement as this: “The city law department will fight every inch of the way to protect the interest of the working man in the proposed readjustment of rates. The proposed change in rates is a discrimination against the poorer class of people.” Opposition of this kind, however, does not always develop. In some instances city officials make a careful study of the proposed rates and cooperate in an endeavor to establish an equitable tariff which apportions the cost of service fairly to those who create the expense.
It is always difficult to formulate schedules for different classes of consumers that will be fair and nondiscriminatory. This is especially true of gas industry, which started out with unscientific schedules. Under the old method of charging, a large number of gas consumers received their service at less than cost and at the expense of other consumers. Every attempt of the companies to make this class of consumers pay for what they use is met with protest.
But the companies will probably continue to fight for scientific rates. Such rates are for the benefit of consumers as a whole, whether they know it or not.
—David Lay
Take-out power
If customers could come and get power at the station, we would make a larger profit by giving them 20 K.W. hours for 40 cents, than we can by charging $2 for delivering the same 20 K.W. hours to their homes at the exact hour when they wish to use it.
—Samuel Ferguson, President, The Hartford Electric Light Company
