Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1898-05-19

on its poles for the accommodation of new
subscribers: plaintiffs poles viii not permit
OF placing additional arms at the top ana
where the electric iii ut wires cross unde
the telephone WltSS. an additional cross
tree or arm must he 81 placed a. to permit
the said telephone wires to pass under the
said electric light wires. thus leaving the
telephone wires.
,. The wires OF Che telephouel are fire.
Quently broken by storms and other causes
and poles are at times thrown down or
over Where broken telephone wires be-
come entaugled With the electric light wires
the pulling and saving OF the light uninSu-
lated wire is apt to destroy the insulation
OF the electric light wire and said insulation
: also likely 10 be destroyed by other agen-
3. Thatin all cases where the said electric
light and telephone wires come in contact
for any reason the Insulation being broken
or imperfect. Il the electric current Is on
the switchboard of (the telephone) it is
certain to be burned out OCcaSioning great
loss to (the telephone company and endan-
gering life.
4. BY reason of the frequent breaking of
said telephone wires, repairs Will become,
for the before mentioned reasons, very
dangerous. and difficult as well by reason of
the fact theat the heavy electric light wires
must be crossed ADORE in stringing new tele-
phone wires from pole to pole.
;. BY reason of the close proximity OF the
electric light wires at such points of inter-
section as aforesaid. upon information and
belief plaintiff alleges that Its (telephone)
service will be injured if not destroyed by
induced and sympathetic currents
Wherefore plaintiff prays.
|. That defendant be perpetually enjoined
and restrained from crossing plaintiffs
wires in the manner aforesaid. and that de-
PENDANT agents and servants be likewise
3 That defendant be perpetualy en-
Joined and restrained from using any and
all wires now in place or to be placed for the
transmission of electric lighting currents
which cross PLAINTIFF wires in the manner
aforesaid
3. For such other or further judgment
order or relief as the court may properly
grant in the premises.
Dated May IA, 1898.
LOWRY s. CLEMENTSON
Plaintiffs Attorneys.
In answer to the above complaint
the defendant, John Harshberger,
has set forth certain reasons why he
cannot run his electric wires above
the telephone wires instead of under
them. One reason given is tina. the
arc lamps which are to swing from
poles and wires low in the center of
street squares can not be so construct
ed from over the top of the telephone
wires. Also the telephone company's
poles are of different heights-20, 20,
80, So and As feet Highland no uni
formity in wire-stretching could be
observed, and electric light poles
will have to be spliced to get over the
telephone wires in places.
Defendant Harshburger also claims
l. =, a.. Al.
phone Company has forfeited all OF
its rights of franchise in the city OF
Lancaster and proceeds to point out
the reason for this assertion.
When Lancaster granted a franchise
to Mr.. MARROW he gave the city a
bond in the sum of $4,000 to insure
the city against damages for any and
all accidents that might arise from or
by the telephone construction. The
latter part of Section 2. Paragraph ID,
of the franchise as granted reads as
| follows:
Any transfer or assignment of the right
| and franchise hereby granted shall be
deemed a revocation of this franchise. I'M
| less the proposed assignee or tranSferee
shall first execute to said city similar bond
of indemnity satisfactory to the common
council.
Some time ago Mr.. NARROW trans
ferred the telephone property to what
is known as the Union Telephone
Company. After doing so the Union
Telephone company failed to file with
the city clerk new bond of indem-
nifty as called for in the franchise
They were notified to do so by S. IL.
Taylor Chen city attorney by City
Clerk Michaelis. and later by Walter
Brennan, now city attorney; but fail
ed to comply. If defendant Harsh
burger succeeds in getting the city
council to act with him in this in
stance it is considered knotty point
for the plaintiff telephone company
to overcome.
As we 60 to press there are strong
indications that the telephone COM
pany will withdraw its suit, owing to
loss of business that would result il
they continue. This is the best way
out Of it and every one hopes that
the conflicting parties will find some
way of accommo dating each other
without resorting to the slow and
costly motion of courts.