Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-10-10
WEDNESDAY. ocToGER 10. 1900.
BELL COMPANY METHODS.

If the City Councils had put a. Max
imum rate for telephone service in the
Bell Company's franchise when that
company was compelled, greatly
against its will. to accept n franchise,
the citizens of this city would have
been spared the trouble and annoy
ance of the present telephone situation.
If 1t had put the Southern States and
Bell Companies on the same footing,
there would have been no exorbitant
charges now and no danger of a tele-
phone monopoly here.
1t is worth while to note that the
Bell Company resisted for nearly a
year the attempt of the City Councils
10 force 1T to accept n franchise, and
finally accepted one only when the City
Attorney was instructed TO proceed
against it and to compel it to quit do
ing business in this city ii resisted.
and successfully, the effort to put a
maximum rate in its franchise and it
denied the right OF Councils to reg
ulate its charges 1t was clearly fore
seen. at the time. that trouble would
follow If franchise discriminating in
cd. as the following recommendation of
the committee of Councils then in
charge of the matter clearly shows:
1--WE most respectfully suggest to the
Councils that the Southern Bell Tele-
phone and Telegraph Company lie
granted a franchise strictly on me
lines OF the FRANCHISE under which The
southern States Telephone and TeIe-
graph Company is now operating so
satisfactorily to their patrons. and, as
we are reliably informed. with profit
TO themselves"
And should they refuse franchise
on the lines of the Southern States
Telephone and Telegraph Company.
that the City Attorney be instructed
to proceed at once by such steps as he
may deem eXpedient to compel said
company to stop doing n local business
in the city of Norfolk"
This report was signed by ]. Lee
Seneca and John l.. Farrant, of the Or
dinance Committee, while w. T.. Will
liams (the other member of the com
mittee) submitted minority report re-
commending that the City Attorney he
directed to proceed al once against the
Bell company to make it stop doing a
local business Failure to comply
with this wise recommendation of tho
committee in question. that the Bcll
company be given franchise identical
In its conditions and restrictions with
the franchise of the States company is
responsible for the present unpleasant
ness. The Bell followed up n surly ac-
ceptance. under compulsion, of it's fran
chise by violating that franchise
through rate-cuttinE. Now 1t takes
advantage of the absence of maxi
mum rate to put up rates.
Taking the Bell companys conduct
since ii first appeared in the local field
II is plain that there will he no free
dom from the annoyance of arbitrary
rates. until Councils correct the initial
mistake of not fixing n maximum rate
for ALL companies dixie
Investigation develops the fact that
the franchise granted by the City
Councils to the American Telegraph
and Telephone Company OF Virginia
empowers that company to do a iocdi
as we'll as long distance telephone bust
ness. While Councils are straightening.
out the telephone tangle and rcmedying
the violation by their predecessors of
the States Company's franchises it Will
be necessary, therefore, TO prescribe
the same maximum gate for the Amcri-