Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-11-10
ELECTRIC LIGHT PROBLEM
Rival Companies to Contest Claims il
Court.
The Contract for the Lighting of the
City and How 1t Became
Legal Question.

Arguments will begin Friday next before
Judge Cole upor the injunction granted the
United States Electric Light Company, re-
straining the District Commissioners from
awarding contract for lighting the streets
of Washington to the Potomac Electric
Company.
The District will not be represented in
this case by either its attorney any of
his assistants, but Mr.. A. S. Worthington
will look after the interests of the District.
This selection is made necessary by the
po sitior assumed by the attorney for the
District and Assistant Attorney Duvall.
When the question first came before the
Commissioners, legal opinion was sought
from the Districts legal advisers, and they
held in unmistakable language that the
District was without power to recognize
the Potomac Electric Company.
This case first had it's birth shortly after
Congress adjourned and the new appropria-
tion became available. Congress at its last
session authorized the Potomac Electric
Company to operate west of Rock creek,
but forbiG any extension east of that line.
When bids were opened for lighting the
city by electricity, the Potomac Company
was found to be the lowest bidder. 1t forth
with claimed the contract, and pointed out
provisions in the appropriation bill which.
1t to the contract. This position was
promptly contested by President Thomas of
the United States Electric Light Company.
and the Commissioners decided to submit
the case to their legal adviser for his opin-
ION as to their action in the premises. As
soon as this reference was made both sides
represented by counsel filed briefs with the
attorney, and the fight centered about the
Districts law offices. Attorney s. T. Thorn
as and Assistant Attorney Duvall heard all
arguments and carefully considered all
triefS In the case. Two or three weeks
later long and carefully prepared opinion
vas received by the Commissioners from
their attorneys, In which the latter held in
unmiStakable terms that the Commission
ers could not under the terms of the Dis
trict appropriation bill accept the bid of
the Potomac company: This opinion was
the subject of several board meetings, and
the Commissioners looked into the case
from every point of view. 1t was evident
early in the discussion that the board was
divided upon the main question. Later il
was thought that whatever action was TAX
en- would be the work of the entire board.
This, however, proved fallacy. The board
was unreconcilably divided. Commissioners
Truesdell and Powell favored the accept
ance of the Potomac company's bid. Com
missioner Ross thought the Commissioners
were without authority TO take such ac
tion. The majority prevailed, however, and
proposal of the Potomac company. COM
missioner Ross, to complete the record,
wrote dissenting opinion. He agreed with
the attorneys for the District, and held
that the Commissioners were without pow
er to recognize the Potomac company east
of Rock creek. AS soon these opinions
were given to the public, President Thomas
of the United States Electric Light Com
pany went into court and obtained an
Injunction restraining the Commissioners
from entering into contract with the Poto-
mac company. The case has been pending
for some months. In the meantime. the
tod Sfof faa hoc cfss iIxr
along lighting the streets and receiving the
pay for the work from the District.