The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1900-02-05

luost are As uAeQ Dy THIS act but as they
are usually rated as business or residence
subscribers, and not wholly dependent
on the number OF telephones on one line.
and as they are in places differing so
widely in many respects from this city.
no exact comparison can be made either
as to the productive capacity of the rates
or as 70 the necessary cost OF the plant
AID equipment or as to the efficiency Of
the service.
In the places where this cheaper tsle-
phone service is had the cost Of con-
sruction and maintenance is usually less
than il is possible for il to be in this Dis
trict- In some places Il is almost wholly
aerial construction. with no prohibition
against erecting poles or stretching wires
across streets and alleys, or attaching
them 10 house-tops. as appears 70 Re the
case in some Of the European cities and
in some C. these cities. companies are al
lowed to stretch their cables through the
sewers. without the expense OF laying con-
( Quits in streets. In many other cities,
however. the rates for telephone service
are higher than those in vogue IN this Lis-
trict. In Grand Rapids. Mich. and per
haps some other cities. where testimony
WAS taken, there were rival companies
causing competition, and where IL was
shown that nearly every subscriber had
two telephones. one belonging 10 each
company The result in such case is necez-
sG.ily more announcement. confusing and
expensive than to have only one COM
ps1y-
The rates Of some companies are only
regulated by mutual contract. without
competition; others, with competition:
while as to others, the rates are fixed in
the charters or by ordinances or statutes
OF the municipal or State governments. As
a rule, the average distance from the
central Office in these other cities where
testimony was taken, is much less than in
this District. and telephones Of the indie
pendent companies, so called, have no
such advantageous connections with long
distance lines as those in this District
have The companies furnishing the lower
rates have generally been Ia business only
a short time, and 10 Is not clear from the
evidence rat they can make any profits
at the rates charged. and at the same
time keep up the plants in good condition
Rate Comparisons Weak.
There are certain contingencies that
must be anticipated Depreciation Of over
head plants and Of underground plants
must be calculated upon and provided Tor.
What is known as electrolysis frequently
interrupts the lines and threatens the de
struction Of the cables. and is an enemy
requiring constant watching IN under
ground construction This Is frequently
caused by the escape Of electric currents
from the trolley wires CT electric light
wires and il meIJs or destroys the pro-
tecting coverings of the cables. I'm over
head construction sleet and Windstorms
and large fires often do great damage The
natural life Of telephone poles Dr. about ten
wears With q new company these things
are not so carefully considered I'm making
up statements as 20 annual income and
profits. experience being required 20 arrive
line IN H.a
profitable or otherwise. The books Of these
independent companies were not shown
and not examined d. experts
Taking all these differences into c0nsld-
Grafton. there can be very little comparison
which can be relied upon between the sew
eral cities where the cheaper rates prevail
and this District, and consequently the
greater part OF the evidence taken by the
compIainants should be- given less weight
in determining the question new Under con-
sidcraJion than the evidence showing the
actual experience. requirements. and con-
tiugGICi5s OF this particular locality. What
some other company can 90 in some other
place where the conditions are essentially
different wages lower as in Europe. prices
OF material less. construction on different
plan. distance from central Office less.
business centre Of city we'll deilu-
"a and nearby. and where there are many
people. the methods In which business Is
conducted. and in ether matters. cannot
aid the court very materially IN ascertain
ing whether the rates fixed by this get,
On a different basis from any Of these viii
afford just remuneration TO the defend
ant fer the kind Of service supplied In this
District under the circumstances under
which the business here has been de-
velopei and maintained. and the court
ought. therefore. To give greater consider
alton 10 the facts derived from the expert
eUce Of the defendant, than 20 theories Of
experts who are without any experience in
this particular field
Based largely on this experience, fully
shown BY the expert accOunt ants. Haskins
and Tompkins. and being satisfied that the
company has been managed with reason
able prudence and economy. employing no
more help and buying no more materials
than was necessary. and that IL has given
the best service which could reasonably
be expected. having the most approved
appliances and employing men and women
who are well skilled in their particular
departments. ] am convinced beyond aly
reasonable doubt. after disallOWing all eN-
penses in the past experience about which
there is any room for fair difference of
opinion. that the defendant cannot con-
tinue to render the same efficient service
to subscribers located throughout this
District that il has heretofore. without in
curing greater expense per subscriber
than the maximum rates fixed by this act
On this principal issue. / am compelled
TO hold chat the avermeut OF the ans or
is sustained by the proofs aud IL Is &
necessary TO undertake 20 determine here
how much money should be set aside
depreciation of plant or other contingent
expenses. or how little reward on capital
invested viii satisfy the rule that requ re-
some return to be possible
Questions of COnstItutIOnaIity.
HAVING reached this conclusion, 1T T
considering all the facts and Circumstances
Of the case proper under the au hOrides
to be considered. and making all ailo ances
which seem 70 be required by the condi-
lions shown. il follows, as a matter OF
course. that these rates are not in my
judgement Just and fair as between the
defendant and the public
No person has a right TO compel another
person to furnish him telephone service
OF other service or property at less tsan
its cost; and Congress has no power to
pass a law which must necessarily have
that effect. No doubt Congress can. by
proper law. that win be understandable
on constitutional grounds. regulate the
rates to be charged BY the defendant, and
the Court need not consider whether the
charges heretofore made by the defendant
and agreed to by the subscribers we're
higher than they ought TO have been, to
be fair and Just to the pabic-
These questions are not raised for judicial
oninion. The Court has no power to fiN
rates That is FOR Congress or the con-
.-,c.iro nertieS IN dO- and IL is NOT for 10