Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-10-05
TELEPHONE TROUBLES.
A Conflict Between the Erie Telephone
Company and Several Subscribers.


Company and Several Subscribers.
A conflict has arisen between the |
management of the Erie Telephone
company in this city and some of its
subscribers, which threatens TO come
before the courts for settlement. 1t
seems that the company's rules re-
quire subscribers TO pay for the use of
their instruments quarterly in ad-
vance, and at the beginning of the
current quarter number of the sub
scribers informed Mr.. Bostick, man.
ager of the company at this place, that
they only wanted the use OF their tele-
phones until the first OF November, at
which time the Pan-Electric company
will be in operation, and that they In
tended using the telephones of that
company. 1t is claimed that Mr.. Bost-
ick refused to accept the payment Of
one month in advance and attempted
TO remove the Erie telephones from tine
houses and stores of these subscribers,
Some of them refused to allow this to
be lone and thus the difficulty arose.
A conflict OF this nature arose between
Mr.. Bostick and Max Elser which re-
suited in the formers going into Mr..
Elser's store on Thursday during his
absence and removing his telephone.
Mr.. Elser had another telephone be-
longing TO the Erie company at his
residence and he brought this to his
store and placed 1t in connection with
the central office but the manage
ment refused to give him service.
A reporter interviewed Mr.. Elser in
his office last night and heard his side
| nj IN
had been a subscriber to
the Erie Telephone company
since short time after it was started
in this city; that he was TO pay quar-
terly in advance for the first twelve
months. He produced his agreement
with the company and read that he
was to have The use of the telephone
for $50 per annum, quarterly In nd.
vance for Twelve months from date OF
connection, aud thereafter until this
agreement Is cancelled by one months
notice In writing being given by either
party to the other.n
"0n the first OF October said Mr.
Elser, ~ notified Mr.. Bostick, IL
writing, that at the ex piration of thirty
days, on the LIST Of November, woulc
not want his telephones. He came Il
me and demanded payment for full
quarter, and offered him payment
until the LIST Of November, which h,
refused. Yesterday he sneaKed int,
my Office while was gone to dinnel
and took out the telephone. None o
the clerks knew anything about tn,
trouble and he was not molested.
! then brought the telephone from m,
J residence and put II up In the office
/ Mr.. Bostick came for this one ais
dming my absence, but the clerk
: would not allow him 10 remove 1t. HI
Z refuses to give me service, and thereb,
: lays himself liable to an action In tn
Z courts. ! have given him the r.
quired thirty days notice and he shall
not remove the second telephone un
!. less he does 80 through the courtsn
I. The interviewer then visited MI
= Bostiek's office, but that gentlemal
I refused to give any explains
ton Of the difficulty. He sal
!. that he had his own views on th
u question, but they were not for news
= paper publicity.
:. Mr. Elser informed the scribe tina
Mr.. John Wilkes was another who ma
r refused to allow Mr.. Boatick 10 remov
Q. a telephone from his place, and tina
O. there were more persons who woul
: do likewise.