I cannot understand how some gas companies who have the incandescent electric system as a competitor can console themselves with the fact that it is not injurious to their gas business, even taking it for granted they are selling as much gas as before its advent. Is this a just reason why they should make no effort to secure their old patronage? I think not, for it is human nature to secure a whole loaf in place of the half, when it is possible to get it. A gas company's revenues would certainly be increased by the step, and a dangerous rival would be made profitable. I think it is a mistake to think that by and by the people will get back to gas. Of course some will, just as gas consumers sometimes go back to coal oil; but, because a few give it up, don't let us deceive ourselves by thinking that all will do it eventually, for the incandescent electric burner is bound to remain wherever it is now in use, and will find its way to the other places where it is not now in use. "That is all very well to talk about," I hear some one say, "but what are they going to do with our prior investment?" To such I would say, push that, too. Cheapen it to its lowest point and urge its use for power and cook stoves until such time that you find yourselves able to supply gas for heating purposes of all kinds. What difference does it make to a company whether the money expended for improvement account be coal gas benches, holders and mains, or dynamos, boilers, and wire? I fail to see the difference, and if improvements have to be made in both, so much the better--it shows a healthy demand for both branches, and should be promptly provided for.