The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-03-24
THE LAW FULLY SUSTAINED.
The Indiana Supreme Court Affirms the Last
of the Three Telephone Cases.

The last OF the three cases involving questions
relating to the validity of the law regarding the
rental Of telephones in Indiana was decided yes
terday in the Supreme Court During the agitation
in last August, growing out of the attempt G.
the Central Union company to continue
the charge of So q month rental by
Constituting the word telephone to mean only
part of the usual service D. NJ. Bradbury de-
manded Of the company to be placed in tele-
phonic communication with the patrons in this
city for the rate fixed by statute. Supe-inten-
dent Hockett replied that the company fur
nished two classes Of service, and one of these
o'clock A. NJ and o'clock p.
his demand twas not for any partial, exception
al or qualified use" Of the service, and suit was
instituted against the company as a common
carrier to enforce his demand by alternative
writ of mandate from the court In the trial of
the case before the Superior Court the company
claimed that by reason Of the large royalties it
paid for the use of instruments, and the
expensive character of the business, it
could not furnish its best class of
service for 90 month without actual loss. The
court decided that Bradbury was entitled to the
relief demanded, and entered Judgment in his
firms in the opinion died yesterday, which was
written by Judge Nblack:
The ruling in the previous cases on the ques-
ton of the laws validity is adhered to- That
the business of common carrier of whatever
class is public employment, and that com
SO far as he is able to do 90
impartiality, are legal propositions too well
established, the court thinks, to require the
ciio of auth laos of
common carriers to the general public were held
and we think correctly the decision states, Ito
be applicable to telephone companies, engaged in
general telephone business. by the case Of the
phone Company. 1t was seemingly conceded at
the trial and has been implicitly con-
coded in argument that the Central
Union Telephone Company might easily and
conveniently have placed Bradbury In telephone
connection with its exchange and other subscrib
ers, through the medium of then existing and
contiguous lines of wire, if it and he could have
agreed upon the price to be charged for the
service desired No excuse has, therefore, been
presented on account of inability of the company
to furnish the required service without mourning
some unreasonable additional expense or unduly
extending its business. The power of a State
Legislature to regulate the prices which tele-
phone company engaged in general telephone
business may charge for the use of its instru-
ments was fully considered in the case OF
AAoNAOts We VIZ OCosC3 ohu VIC oouSAuoAoA UaOh
reached was that notwithstanding the
patented quality Of the instruments
in question, the power of State
Legislature in that respect is plenary and COM
plete. 1t was also held in that case that the
word telephone" as used in the act of April 3D.
1885, had reference to an organized apparatus or
combination Of instruments, usually used in
transmitting, as well as receiving telephone
messages" The decision states that the con.
struction thus placed apsn the aat "an!::.iues to
meet tue an probation of the courts judgment,
...u may now be considered an established
rule of statutory construction in this State.
Therefore, the case is affirmed at the cost Of the
Central Union company.