Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1884-11-11
THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN.
COST OF cULVERT cur DOWN.

observation-disclosures CONGRATULATED.
The regular monthly meeting OF The
Board ef Aldermen took place Yesterday
evening AZ O'Clock. Present Mr.. l.. IL.
Bass, president, and the following mem
btrs Messrs. Adams, Burwell. Cabell,
thaihn, Crenshaw, Crump. Diskerson.
Glasgow, Page, Rose, Taylor, ana WILL
liaus.
Dir. Randolph was annornced as being
out Of town.
The clerk read the minutes Of the pre-
vious meeting, and they were signed ~
the president.
STANDING COMMITTEES.
Ffndnce.-Mr. Glasgow presented re-
port asking for $4,000 TO pay contractors
for paving alleys; also. putting the eulvert
assessment at 6 per cent. and recommend
ing special clerk at a salary OF $1,000, 10
review the assessment, aud reducing the
assessment from 10 TO IL cents per foot,
and also 10 extend wsicr-mains to cuiyern
wherever necessary. The Ordinance Com
nittee was asked in one OF the resolutions
OF the report TO frame ordinances covering
the views desired.
The report and the accompanying sug-
gesticns were adopted unanimously.
Wdifr.-Mr. DieKerseu, OF this com
mittee, presented usual monthly report
referring claim OF aTr. BarganiD to Com
Riitee on Claims and Salaries. The report
was adopted.
Fire.-Report asking for the ergnniza-
tioH Of Steam Fire Engine Company No. 6.
The company has an engine now, and the
idea Of organization was 10 elect the OFF,
GERS and members at the next meeting OF
the Fire Committee, In order that the CON-
paDy may come In for pay in the next
years assessment. The report was adopted.
Sireets.--Report asking for sl,20e to
pave streets and alleys was adopted.
James Rtrr ImpTOroRent.-Mr. Cren-
shaw presented report, announcing the
fact that the committee and the United
States Engineers had come 10 satisfactory
arrangements in giving the engineers the
control OF the city's machinery in the inn
| prsyement of the James river. The report
was received and fled
TIE CLAY TELEPHONE.
Mr.. Glasgow, chairman oi special
| committee Of the Board appointed to con-
slider an ordinance passed by the Common
Council granting the right OF way through
! the city to the Clay Telephone Company.
submitted the following
A contest exists between the company
and the Bell Telephone COMPANY. the lat
ter having instituted suit in Philadelphia
against the Clay for infringement IL is
claimed that Bell is the original dscayercr
Of the only method hitherto used for trans
| mitting speech 10y electricity. There has
been much litigation. and so far tho de-
cisiOns Of the courts have sustained Bells
| claims. In the case against Dolbear and
others in the United States Court
! FOR TIE district of Massachusetts jus
/ tice Gray. an associate Judge Of the
| Supreme Court. fully sustains Bells claim
| We think the agents OF the Clay Company
7 tdilit the above. Seeking only iniomq-
tion moi CI-pdrte, We have found a short
| opinion given in the New York journal Of
! Ccmmrce directly TO The point, and ex-
| pressing the conclusoh to which your
| committee have come. il is an answer to an
inquiry from this city, as follows:
RICHMOND, Va. October 10, 1854.
- Edifor Of the Joaraal Of Commerce:
"For some time past we have been using
| telephone supplied by the Bell Telephone
Company. A new company just getting
! 10 work here offers to serve us for about
! half the price charged by the Bell Com
pany. To-day we are served with pam
! phltt containing the opinions oi emInen,
! Judges, which Ne have not read, but sup
! pose the substance Of them is contained in
/ the inclosed slip. Can We safely employ
the Clay Telephone Company:
-. ". L.
" Repl,L-Thr Bcll telephone patent i,
! OF the iron clad variety. It's owners have
/ hitherto been able 10 fcht of all rivals in
the courts. They are now engaged In
fierce litigation involving question oi
| priority Of invention. Under the circum
! stances. il does not seem advisable 10 ac-
cept the service OF any cheaper competition
Of the Bell telephone unless one could b'
absoluteld insured gainst the consequence
, resulting from possible infringement o.
the patent
TO grant this petition wsuld be an en-
couragement 10 our people to unite IN al
infringement Of the Bell patent, as the mat
Ter cow stand, in the courts. Mean time
IS we understand il, the Clay Telephone
| Company may establish its wires on th'
house-tops. as the Bell did, without any
authority or endorsement from the Council
Your committee deem 1t unnecessary t
consider the subject further. They will
add. however. that il Is question to b'
prayclv considered. whether competition
may not be obtained by sOIe other methol
than by multiplying lines OF telephones
They suggest that when more than on
company offers efficient service. with
clear title TO its device. it might bc feasible
10 let the franchise periodically fo the on
that would furnish a satisfactory service !
the least cost. We only present this as
suggestion worthy Of consideration in tht
future. In consideration of the above
yoIr committee report adversely to th
LettiOn.
Nr. Tsvlor was opposed to monopoly
and favored the Clay telephone. Dir. Nc
cher had said that il another compan,
were allowed 10 come here he wOult
"frecZe them out He was tho Jay Goul'
mouth-piece of = monopoly. lie vas To-
any telephone company that would bresl
downs monopoly.
Dir. Joseph Kate. upon invitation. al
dressed the Board. he declared that ther
was no suit against the Clay Telephon
| Companv. The suits now pending Ner
between Bell and DOlbear. and. howeye
decided, could mol affect the Clay Iele
phonc Compsny in the least. lie had bee
asked TO establish a telephone by peOpl
who were dissatisfied both with The servle
and the prices charged by the Bell Com
pany, No citizen could lose cent. no
could the citv LOSE = cent. All that the Cla
Telephone asked was chance for compei
ton. Let the companies fight 1t out.
Mr.. Chaiin said be had threatened 10 su
the Bell Telephone Company for incsmp'
t,nt service. He wanted the Chinese va
around Richmond cut down. and compel
lion in al trades and enterprises invited
come in. II was an absurd position for ih
Board to take 10 pass upon the legal nerl
Of the case. lie was opposed 10 Jay Goul
monopoies. and his Western Union league
Dir. Glasgow spoke in advocacy OF b
report, and CLAIMED that he had given clio,
time 10 the legal merits OF the case u
spoke at length, giving logical argumen
TO support his theory. and diving into Ia
and electricity to back il. He vas oppose
10 the multiplyin. OF telephones. and col
sidrred it an evil. lie favored les'ing III
franchise periodically.
Dir. Page didn't think the Council ha
ANYTHING 10 do with the law ease. Becsu'
there was legal point involyin: the rg'
: OF \ patent on reaper, was no reason WI
I | farmer Shouldn't buy the best reapr
He wanted guarded competition ia lei
phene as well a. other things.
Nr. Rose moved The rejection oi the +
port. aud the concurrence in The acton
the Common Council, granting the y
Telephone Company the right 10 erect poN
! and run telephone wires through the clt'
The Board refused to concur in the aclio
e Of the Common Council by a vste sf aSe'
noes 10.
d. LAnP-LiGHTING.
ri. nzo.d ..ono,rnd In th. rssolfiti