The Seattle Star Newspaper, November 3, 1924, Page 13

ne BOYS EWARDED | Real Entertaining Bill FEE an od at c . n Dinner || et Orpheum This Week . | Moe oCure ocold (iia. ere is our p & BoyY—PAGE MR. ROSS! surplus power The only excuse given by the proponents of Initiative No. 52 (the Bone Bill) why any citizen of Seattle should vote for it is that, with the first unit of the Skagit now supplying electric energy, the Seattle municipal plant has “surplus power.” Both the City Council of Seattle and Mr. J. D. Ross, the superintendent of our lighting plant admit that the city has no “surplus power.” WHAT does our city council say? Under Ordinance No. 47715, passed September 15, 1924, the City Cours cil declared —“‘Available sources of supply of hydro-electric energy from such plants (Skagit and Cedar River) is, at present, limited to approximately 43,000 kilowatts.” “The maximum demand for hydro-electric energy is now approximately 42,000 kilowatts. Demand is increasing at the average annual rate of not less than 15%.” % a tablets r 4 INITIATIVE s2 —is your street car mess multiplied twenty times. —it means 7000 more politicians on | QUININE your payrolls. at A —It will cost YOU millions. It is FOR ‘fla ves politicians and AGAINST the public. The box bears this signature Vote AGAINST Initiative 52 Citizens Association Against Initiative 62 6G. Ue Lbrore ting from a Cold. rime “It is necessary that increased supply of hydro-electric energy be provided as quickly as possible.” Does that show any “surplus power” ? WHAT does J. D. Ross say ? its own street railway system from the private company. In 1923 it paid for such power Z In a letter written to the City Council, on bite Viet penitence. ; October 24, 1924, Mr. Ross discussed certain Oct. 24, 1924 x ; roposals received for power for industries to The Honorable City Council: Bp Don’t be confused. Keep the cost of your living down by foe tiGeattip is I negotiated for a paper mill with A @ “ ° Chicago people some time ago . . . A | Voting AGAINST Referendum 16 We quote from his letter— wv Thea comenthiedofr, Ail these Se This i i : “All these inquiries were for mor er th: inquiries were for more power is ‘ ; ese inquiries were for e€ pow an - b ke the Anti Margarine and anti-butter bs ch Skacit f hh P tunit,” | {828,,cam Pe spared at the i ubstitute bill—intended to drive Nut Mar can be spared at Skagit from the present unit. Skagit from the present unit. a Je - : : nd this fact, cow wil ¢ low rate ) aes the vegetable product, from the mar- “Since we have not the current to furnish them, | Gfered was wets teeta de if oa ae * { matter at that time. EB 2 and force you to buy butter at any price further negotiations, unless for a small mill, T bees s keg ine hes aa the butter-makers want to charge would be useless. amount at the present time for a smaller . ill. I have confidence in th i arn Does that show any Prgpemittie samy sies cs, ter-makers h in this bill has been exposed. The but: “surplus wer’? Since we have not the current ORS confaai rs have tried to cover it up by misleading and p po . to turdalah thous; Sartiiee nego: sree eke A eT agos the suse of Nut Margarine SEATTLE NOW BUYING POWER tations, unless for a small mill ” Referendum 16, and vote : : wo} useless. _ AGAINST a BUTTE = » and vote Seattle is today buying all the power to run Yours truly, p U R MONOPOLY. ince pee P J.D. ROSS, Supt. of Lighting Filed Oct. 27, 1924— File No. 97012. Presented to Council and referred to Dept. of Efficiency Committee. over $635,000. Does that show any “surplus power”? If Seattle has any cheap “surplus power” from its own plant, why should it not furnish it to its own street railways, thereby reducing the carfare so that every citizen of Seattle can receive the benefit. This right was reserved to the City in the Contract. Your Citizens’ Committee believes that Seattle’s municipal plant was built by Seattle citizens for Seattle citizens. That is not only poor business policy, but a betrayal of public trust to divert our electric energy to Spokane and other cities when we have not sufficient electric energy to operate our own street railways, or to furnish power to new industries seeking to locate here. Their whole “‘surplus power” argument is a deliberate misrepresentation to hide from the people the true purpose of Initiative No. 52. The real purpose is — to buy the private properties, thereby raising taxes, destroying competition, and creating another street rail- way mess, The job-holders and job-seekers, in their mad racefor more political power, have allied themselves against the wage-earners and home- owners and against the best interests of Seattle. AS A MATTER OF HARD, COLD FACT, SEATTLE HAS NO “SURPLUS POWER" Vote Against Initiative No. §2. —Citizens’ Association Against Initiative No. 52 If your precinct uses voting machines pull down the lever over the word . FOR —_—— | a | STATE CONSUMERS’ LEAGUE | “ Against AGAI ST Referendum 16 Membership Over 35,000