The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-04-17
NEW PHONE SYSTEM
WHY Aldermen Refused a
Franchise to Piles.
HE WOULD MAKE NO PLEDGES
The Home Company Readily Granted
Tranchi-e-Another New scheme
The sunset Company.

prepared 10 admit that they are TO blame
for tae failure of the new Standard Tel
ephone Company 10 secure a franchise IN
this city. or for the consequent absence
OF Seattle from the list Of cities where
the company proposes TO operate. The
members Of the board Of aldermen who
voted the ordinance down claim that II
met this fate because s. II Piles, who
applied for the franchise. was unwilling
to make known who were his principals
or TO give any security that the company
would actually construct a telephone
plant within a reasonable time. As ev1-
d@nce that they were ready 10 grant
franchise 70 bona nde competing COM
pany. these aldermen quote the fact that
one was granted to the Home Telephone
company, represented by A. II. Brookes.
The Piles franchise was referred TO a
special committee. IF which Mr.. LoveJoy
was chairman. and was defeated BY the
adverse votes Of Messrs. Loyejoy. SN ee-
ney, elise and Compton. Concerning the
reasons for his voting against ii. Mr..
Lovejoy said yesterday:
As the Post-Intelligencer stated. s. II.
Piles presented a petition for a telephone
franchise in March year ago. he want
ed the franchise without any conditions.
lie would not tell MS who was backing
the scheme, and would not consent 10
allow the city any per cent. of the net
earnings. and. In fact, would give no In
formation or make any avertures regard
Ing what he would do or expected TO do.
He specified no period OF time when he
would have his plant in operation. True
he agreed to put phones III for very
low figure. but he would consent to no
conditions that would protect the city
or show evidence of good faith.
Altogether. Mr.. Piles actions and de-
meanor made his position open to seri-
Gus criticism 1t appeared 10 US like
money making speculation on his part.
] believed then and believe now that he
intended TO secure the franchise for pure
~ speculative purposes. and hold IL for
sale. AS chairman OF the special commit
tee. | wrote out our report on the matter.
and in II specified that MIR Piles and his
colleagues should put up a cash bond or
guarantee for 500 that at least some
portion Of the plant should he in opera
ton within six months, and II no phones
were In operation at that time the bond
should be forfeited TO the city. The bond
asked was $500, and not 81 500 as Mr.. Piles
is reported as saying. Before | filed that
report with the council | saw MIR. Piles
and told him that II he could give us any
proof of his sincerity in the matter and
could in any way show US that he was
backed by men who meant business. !, for
one. would recommend that the bond he
lessened and the time extended from six
months 10 nine months. But he would
listen TO nothing, anu would agree to
nothing. lie said he would not put up
cent. would not produce bond and
would not specify when his company
would commence work. Under the cir
cumstances what could we do? We did
not grant the franchise
Shortly thereafter A. N. Brookes and
others petitioned for a franchise Tor
new telephone plant. stating that phones
IN dwelling houses would cost but s. per
month, and in business houses 81 per
month, or something like that. He also
specified that the city should receive
per cent. of the net earnings of the com
pany. lie was to commence soon, but no
date was set. He kept nothing back and
his proposition appeared feasible and bus
iness-like. and the franchise was granted.
No Mr. Brookes and his associates, how
ever. did nothing toward putting up their
new plant. sI saw him a short time ago.
and he said that when the council passed
the ordinance cutting down the schedule
OF charges Of the Sunset Telephone Com
many they concluded that IL would be I'M
safe to do anything for the time being
that the Sunset company would undoubt-
edly meet the cut. and that the subscrib-
ers throughout the city would keep the
phones they have in preference 10 put
ting I'm those Of a new company. SO that
is where the matter rests"
Manager Armstrong, OF the Sunset Tele-
phone Company when seen yesterday re-
garaing the new company, said: II don't
believe that the new Standard Company
is backed by the people and the capital
that has been reported In the newspa-
pers II is said the company has total
hacking OF $3.50. 600 90. but | don't believe
IT, They would Ike to have the Bell
patents. but they haven't them, and
won't he very likely 20 get them. Men
ton IS made of their own patents, which
they claim arc better than those OF the
Bell company. but II the new patent
amounted 20 much think We would have
heard of II before this Mr.. Piles SAYS
that the Standard representative stated
that the Sunset Telephone Company in
good times pulled down 81 90 year pro-
NJ ont OF Seattle. I don't see how
the company could do that when the total
revenues 10 not reach that sum"
Attorney Lehman. OF Tacoma. Is now
IN the city and II Is said he viii soon
appIy for telephone franchise quoting
81 ~ per month for business houses and
3 ~ for dwellings,. But every subscriber
must sign \ contract 20 keen the phones
for i've years. and also subscribe Tor
81 bond paid In four quarterly Install
fnents. 81 <le1 each. Then the price or
the 'phoucs viii be- reduced to s. for husi-
ness houses and So for dwellings, hut
! If the subscriber ceases 20 use the phone
before the expiration Of the five years,
Al