Evening star., 1902-03-12
TELEPHONE CHARGES
ARGUMENT MADE, FOR THE SUB
sCRIBERS.
The Case in the Suprsme. .Sourt-Right
Of Congress to E< Rates-The
Company's- Status.

After Mr.. A. S. Worthington concluded
his argument before the United States Su-
preme Court yesterday aft ernoon in the
case Of the Chesapeake and Potomac Tele-
phone Company against Manning and 9TH
ers Messrs. A. A. Bfrney and John J..
Hemphill, of counsel for Manning and 9TH
ers, addressed the court. Messrs. Birney
and Hemphill maintained that the plenary
power OF Congress to legislate upon public
subjects in the District Of Columbia is not
limited by the fact that the exercise Of
that power may injuriously affect private
interests The exercise of that power in
regulating rates to be charged by public
service corporations is legitimate and the
means adopted in the telephone case was
plainly adapted to that end. The Chesa-
peake and Potomac Telephone Company
Is New York corporation. 1t was not
chartered by Congress, they maintained,
and Congress has done no more than to
suffer it to do business in the District of
Columbia.
The Only Recognition Given.
The only recognition the company claims
is found In clauses Of two appropriation
bills to pay it small sums for services rem
dered and in clauses in other bills provid-
ing for the regulation Of wires and poles Of
any existing telegraph, telephone or cleo
trio light company The defendant COM
pany was not named in any of these pro-
visions and in each case Congress reserved
the right to repeal it at will and without
compensation Had Congress chartered the
company there would be no doubt as to its
right to repeal the charter and cause It to
remove it's conduits. wires, etc, and counsel
inquired how Congress could have less
power with a company that had merely
been suffered to pursue Its business
They maintained that Congress was not
bound to confer with the telephone COM
pany or grant a hearing before exercising
its power of legislation.
Charges Extortionate.
The dividends earned by the company
were cited to show that the charges Of the
company were extortionate. This great in
come had been derived from a rate Of
charges averaging s1o6 per telephone sta
tion. They claimed the company had failed
to show what has been the annual ex-
penses Of maintenance and operation
chargeable to telephone users. The charges
of companies outside of this city were cited
to show that rates In the District were ex-
tOrtlOnate. Counsel claimed also that there
was substantial difference between con-
ditions in this and other cities to affect the
expense of maintenance
Mr.. Griggs Concludes the Argument.
When the court assembled today Mr.. John
w. Griggs Of counsel for the telephone
company appeared to conclude the argu-
ments.
Mr.. Griggs occupied the court with his
argument today but short time He
claimed that the telephone calls made by
Manning were so numerous that there was
no profit from his business. He declared
that 1T would be inequftabei for the court
to approve the decision of the Court Of
Appeals, because Of the hardship that de-
cfson would work against the telephone
corporation, which, he claimed was fur
nishing telephone service toSthe people of
this city at as reasonable aTprice as pos
sible