The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-07-08

|
Ii the telephone company continues in bust
ness, 1t must supply you at that rate
| E&press YOUR Willingness to pay at that rate
ana perslstently refuse to enter into any con-
| tract Tor a different rate
Ii your instrument is taken out let it 60. and
report the TACT at once to the managing commit
Tee; linen prepare to be patient for a short time
| suits. ~ ~ -
we further recommend that telephone patrons
unite themselves by written obligation 20 support
the effort now being made to uphold the law and
defeat the exactions of the company We have
prepared suitable papers to carry out this end
which Will be submitted to you at this meeting
JOHN W. MURPHY, Chairman
l.. S. AYREs
r. 0. HAWKINS,
JOHN h. Sullivan, Committee.
JOHN A HOLMAN, Secretary
THE REMARKS OF TELEPHONE PATRONS
captain j. B. Conner suggested at the con-
cIuslon or the reading of the report that, al
though ne had no objection to interpose to the
course OF action proposed by the committee,
ne thought 1t advisable not to make any agree
ment between the telephone patrons finding
unless onehalf or two-thrds of the entire num-
Der join in it,
Mt Iaggart thought there should be an addi-
tlonal agreement, in order to give protection to
all; that if the company should remove the tele-
phone of any patron for refusing to sign the new
contract, they should all Immediately order the
removal of their instruments. He subsequently
made motion to this effect, which was, after
1urther discussion, unanimously adopted.
W. h. Tucker said that when the Central
Union Telephone Company began business in
indianapolis, the city gave to it several thou.
sahos OF dollars IN granting it permission to use
the streets and the fire-alarm poles in considera-
to Al
poles painted and in repair. This thew had not
done. He thought that, as the company was
now endeavorlng to take advantage of the citi-
zens' the City Council should be requested to re-
peal the ordnance granting them the right to
operate IN this CITY, (which could be easily done
because the ordinance contained a clause in
winch the Council expressly reserved this right
=, IL. y. hawkins stated that it was the plan of
the managing committee to secure the sigma
lures or all patrons of the company to an agree.
nent to act unitedly, not only in INDIANAPOLIS
out throughout the State. The committee had
Deen somewhat embarrassed in their proceedings
oy the lnslnuatlon that they didn't know who
they represented, and that the COMPANY had no
trouble with the patrons, but it was all with the
committee. The telephone company he said
had not only rejected all their propositions for a
compromise until the differences could be settled
IN court, but had insisted that they should have
the right to dictate the kind of case upon
which the question should be settled The com
mlttee thought that if the patrons conceded
to the company the money which would
De given them under continuance of the old
rates, just as if the Legislature had never passed
any law regulating the telephone business thew
ought TO at least be conceded the right to stand
on equal and fair grounds with the company be-
lore the courts. The fight will not be small
one Inc telephone company is represented by |
some of the best lawyers in Indiana and in the |
country and they had declared that they |
would carry the to the highest courts--that |
they would even take it to the English Parlia-
ment If they could. Money would be required |
to carry on the conflict with this companv |
and 1t would have to come from the subscribers
of whom he believed seventy five per cent in
this city would sign the agreement, and fully as
large per cent. of the patrons throughout the
State would join in the fight
II. II. Fulton said that in Richmond and Terre
Haute there had been telephone wars and that
IN each place large number of the patrons had
ordered out their telephones, but as there was
not unanlnlty IN the action, they had one by
one nad The instruments put In again, until the
Thought that the same trouo,e would occur mere |
if there was not absolute unanimity.
Charles Martindae thought that the patrons
were not going far enough. They didn't seem
to appreciate the fact that they held the advan-
tage The telephone company had something
to sell, and the people represented in this meet
ing, were their only buyers. The telephone is
not a necessity. The people had done without
it. They could do without again. The
instruments; ought to- be ordered
out and kept out until the company
comes to terms. The company has plant here
that is worth much to them. They can't afford |
to give it away allow it to lie idle. They can
better afford to furnish the service at So per
month than cease operations. There are gentle
men here now whose telephones have been taken |
out because they refused to sign the new con-
tract presented by the company The thing for
the patrons all to do is to order out the in |
struments and keep them out until the company |
comes to terms Mr.. Martindale offered |
motion providing that all telephones should be
removed until the company agrees to furnish !
the service for SO a month but it was afterwards |
withdrawn.
E. B. Martindale thought that the suggestion
of Captain Conner a wise one. Ii there |
were not at least onehalf of the telephone |
patrons in favor of this war. the minority could
do nothing but inconvenience themselves and !
ultimately they would have to order the instru-
ments back again He believed that at least
two-thirds would sign the proposed agreement
We will then proceed on the basis of law, and
not until the company reduces the charges to the
statutory limit will we pay for telephone service
Until the Supreme Court decides on the question
of the validity of the telephone act, /
am in favor of standing by the law to the last
In adherence to the law is only safety as a
government, We will pay all that the law al
lows the company to charge, and no more, until
the Supreme Court decides the act unconstitu-
tional. The money is as good in our pockets as
in the companys. 1t is the business of the com
pany to contest the validity of the law, and not
ours. We should not start in the fight, however,
with less than a majority of the patrons.
The report of the committee was adopted by
unanimous VOTE
THE AGREEMENT OF THE PATRONS.
The following agreement uniting the patrons
in the war upon the telephone company was read
and signed by the persons and firms whose
names are given below:
The undersigned agree to act in concert in opposi
ton to the efforts of the Central Union Telephone
Company to evade the new telepho..o law, approval
April l3 1855, and for that purpose bind our !
selues to abide by the actions of the managing con-
mittee of the telephone patrons, and by its recm-
1nendations from time to time made, in its efop to
uphold the law. We concur in the recommendation of
that committee presented at the meeting held the
Superior Court room No. /, Tuesdy: |
July 7, 1885, and approve the action of |
that meeting. We bind ourselves to pay |
sum not exceeding $5-$I of which is to be aid |
forthwith the may be called for by the |
managing committee through the treasurer ard for |