The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1892-07-25
PORTLAND'S WATER RATES
The Case Between the Commission
and the Company.
PRELIMINARY HEARING ON THE
INSPECTION OF THE BOOKS.

Volumes Containing the Company's
Records Measure About Half Cord
The Citys Counsel Say that the Books
Decision OF the Case-The Company's
Lawyers Give Reasons for Not
Presenting the Bools-Referees Defer
Their Decision.
The preliminary hearing in the case
between the Board Of Water Commits
sioners of the City of Portland and the
Portland Water Company was held in
the Supreme Court room Saturday after
noon before the referees, Chief Justice
Peters and Judge Foster. The hearing
was upon petition by the water board
that an order be issued requiring the
water company to produce all its
books showing it's financial affairs and
| condition, and all papers and written in
struments in its possession relating to
the cost of construction and operation of
the water works, the past and present
| income and expenditures of the COM
pany, and the issue of stock and bonds,
and all existing contacts relating to its
revenues, for the inspection by the coun-
sci for the city at reasonable hours. The
Board of Water Commissioners, Hon.
George F. Emery, Rev. HenryS. Burrage
and Henry H. Burgess, with their counsl,
Hon. E. M. Rand, Hon. Seth L. Larrabee
and City Solicitor John j. Lynch were
i present. The water company was re-
presented by Hon. j. W. Symonds, Hon.
A. A. Strout, Hons. N. and III. B. Cleaves
| and Hon. Clarence Hale. Just previous
to the hearing, dray load of books was
| backed up to the door, carried into the
court room and piled up upon one of the
tables. They were the books of the
Water Company and the pile measured
nearly half a cord.
Mr.. Larrabee, in Opening the Case
| for the water board, read the motion
and the agreement of submission, the
substance of which is that the referees
are to determine:
I First--Whether the rates now charged by the
| R0fGldnQ water company 10 WdI0T bdkeTS Ill
the city of Portland are excessive or exhorbi-
| tant within the meaning of the contract be.
| tween the said water company and the City OF
Portland, dated February %, 1868, and ap-
Second-If the first question is answered in
the affirmative by the judgment of the referees,
is n a Y @ BE- s a thy y sf "a
what changes in such water rates are required
to make them reasonable as compared with the
rates in other cities with due consideration
andinanmn within
| terms of said contract.
| The sixth section of the con-
tract referred to provides that the rate
charged to the water takers shall be
reasonable as compared with the rates in
other cities with due consideration to
the cost and income of the works.
Mr.. Larrabee said the issue then being
whether the rates now charged water tax
ers are exhorbitant, taking into consid-
Grafton the cost and income of the
works, the counsel for the city submit
that the books of the Portland Water
Company show its income, it's cost of
construction and the existing contracts
relating to its revenues are the best evil
dence of what the rates charged by the
Portland Water Company to its water
takers are and whether or not they are
| exhorbitant. They further submit that
| they are the only reliable evidence of what
| the rates charged by the company are.
| Whether or not the rates are exhorbitant
or excessive as compared with the rates
of other cities, having due consideration
to the cost and income of the works can
only be shown and determined by Your
Honors after the cost of construction and
| the income of the Portland water works
are found. The result of an examination
of these books must form the basis of the
decision of the referees in this case. Mr..
| Larrabee claimed that it was not an I'M
reasonable request, that it was clearly
within the twenty-sixth rule of the equi-
Of reference, it is provided that the ref
erees are clothed with all the powers
which court of equity would have to
hear and determine these questions.
Judge Symonds Replied
for the water company. He said the
motion itself is but mere incident in a
very much larger proceeding. For pc
Rod of more than year prior to the sub
mission of these questions to arbitration
correspondence has been going on be.
tween the Board of Water Commissioners
and the officers of the water company
covering every point which is in contro-
versy in the present proceeding. I have
in my hand and desire to put into the
case copy of the entire correspondence
1t will not be denied that every detail as
to the cost of construction and the in
come of these works which has beer
asked for by the Board of Water Com
missioners has been given them in the
most exact and definite form. There
has not been a thing, with
one exception, which they have asked
for during this period of more than q
year, upon which they have not had the
most precise, exact and full information
Of course, in the hearing the books OF
the company will be open to their exam
ination if they wish to verify the inform
alton which has been given them. The
only item of information which
has been withheld is this:
They have asked us certain questions as
to the cost of construction and income Of
the works outside Of the city of Portland
which we have declined to give anc
which we still submit is not pertinent fol
the consideration of the court in this de
cision. We have been disposed to avoie