The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-02-25
DEFINITE ACTION DEFERRED.
The Central Union Will Do Nothing Until the
Collateral Cases Are Decided.

An Associated Press dispatch from Chicago
states that "the board of directors of the Gen.
trail Union Telephone Company will probably
take no definite action in reference to the
future conduct of it's business in Indiara under
the new law until y decision is reached by the
Supreme Court of that State in two other collat-
eral cases, which have not been passed upon by
the court. but which are still pending before it. !"
Mr. J. F. Walick, of this city, one of the d.
rectors of the Central Union. in an interview
published in the Chicago News il reported as
saying:
'sThe decision of the Supreme Court of Indiana
sustaining the law prohibiting telephone compa-
MES from charging patrons above So per month
Tor ordinary services is quite blow to the Cen
trail Union company. l attended meeting OF
the directors today but after talking the matter
over it was decided to postpone action until an
other meeting. I do not see what we can do, as
the charge allowed by the law will not meet the
expenses in city the size of Indianapolis The
larger the number of telephones the greater the
cost of the service is In small place, where
there are, say, only fifty subscribers one girl
can attend to the Office; but in our city there
one thousand subscribers and it requires quite
number of employees to attend to the exchange
the passage of the law there was a
good deal of feeling against the telephone COM
pany, and we lost a great many subscribers.
When the law was passed we agreed with other
patrons to test it in the courts, and while the
case was pending maintain our charge of 30 per
month for each, promising to refund the differ
ence between that and the price named in the
law in case it was pronounced valid by the court.
Under this pledge we will have to pay back
about $3.50 However, nothing will be done
until our lawyers have considered the situation
and given US their advice. Our exchange has
been designated by disinterested observers as
the banner exchange of the country, and our
cities"
The Chicago Herald editorially approves the
Indiana law. and advocates the enactment of a
similar statute in Illinois. 1t says:
ut is possible that the Legislature bore too
heavily upon the Indiana company in requiring
that its maximum charge should be $50 year,
but the public policy of wise and intelligent regu
lation of such monopoly as this must be apparent.
1t is outrageous that even for the very best of
service the company in Chicago, for instance.
should charge $l25 year on each instrument in
use. That charge is believed to be greater than
is made anywhere else in the United States and
is maintained because the company is without
opposition. 1t necessarily uses public franchises
in it's work. Where its wires are not strung upon
poles in the public streets, or alleys they are
carried in conduits under such streets fair
profit would not be denied the company by any
reasonable person, but since its management will
not voluntarily reduce tolls within reasonable
compass the police power of the State ought to
be invoked for the protection of their patrons
| from their rapacty."