Evening star., 1902-03-13

or from 100000 TO s220OO0 for 2.oO0-linc
plant. The actual cost of the Grand Rap
Ids plant Of 1900 telephones was s16o,oOn:
At Richmond ] 200 stations plant cost $50
each, at Norfolk 1000 stations cost 500 per
station, at Detroit 1895 stations cost $120
per station. Counsel claimed there was
nothing in the local conditions to cause
more cost for construction than in other
cities.
If we look to asphalt as the cause of
the trouble they claimed, I'VE find 1t t"S-
titled that the total present value of the
outside plant Is 1881 900 and the real cost
20 per cent additional, making S4O0,JOD III
all, and that the total cost for asphall from
1891 to 1897 was $4,000, which is less than
10 per cent Of the total cost of the outside
plant, to say nothing of the inside. These
SIX years, ending in 1897, were years Of the
heaviest construction and reconstruction,
and this hardly represents fair average
OF the company's experience as to aSl halt
In addition to this one-half of the over
head construction is iron wire, and not
copper, which is the more costly of the two.
l. we take the inside plant the switchboard
here has cost no more than similar switch
boards of the Bell companies of like size
in other cities. and to purchase instruments
and other equipment for Washington would
cost no more than for any other city.
Royalties and Cost Of Telephones.
1.-THE appellant does not own the tee-
phones it installs, but under its 1883 con-
tracts with the American Bell Telephone
Company pays that company a yearly
rental of $50 for each receiver and trans
mitter and royalty of 81 for each switch
board drop in use In 1897 this rental and
royalty amounted to S15,5IS.G2 1t cannot
be imagined that except for the ownership
of three -fifths of the stock of this company
by the American Bell Telephone Company
any part of this would have been paid,
for other company about whose affairs
testimony has been taken pays royalty.
All buy their telephones and switchboards
outright. This is equally true of the Ca
madam company and the companies operat-
ing in Great Britain and In continental
Europe, as of all the independent COM
panies of this country. The cost to the
defendant for what it buys for each sub
scriber's instrument is about 50, and it
pays $50 yearly rental for the transmitter
and receiver
Prices are quoted to show that in other
cities instruments used by the telephone
company do not cost them as much as
here. no royalties being paid.
Court decisions in other cases are cited
to show that the statute rates made for the
District of Columbia are reasonable.
The Annual Expense.
The annual expense claimed by the tele-
phone is declared to be excessive and to be
made up of items not properly chargeable
to expense Of maintenance and operation
ITO prove such annual expense the ap-
pellant submitted certain tables made up
cember n, 1897 explained by the account
ant Haskins. These show a total expense
for the six years of S72S,323.28 an average
of $l21 ,3S7 12 per anpum for all telephones
and Of s6657 for the average number Of
1,S23.5 telephones In use In that period,
All Outlays Charged to Expense
This great aggregate is reached by the
process of charging to expense everything
that ingenuity could provide excuse for
putting under that head. as appears at a
glance from the charge to maintenance in
1897 of $1O6, 146.60 as against $37 ,2OS.9S in
1892. s37,393.71 in 1893 sB1,O04.94 in 1894,
s3S, 800. 81 in 1895 ana s51, ,94S.s5 in 1896 an
average for those five years of $43, ,2S9 Is,
as against the $53 765 Sc which the enor-
nous increases In 1897 makes the average
maintenance for the-s years.
Improperly Charged to Expense.
Specific items found In this charge to ex-
pense and not properly ehargeable thereto
in determining cost of exchange service for
the six years are as follows: Travelling,
D11941; ditto, $9,S4O.4 45; miscellaneous in
terest, 1906 10; interest on first mortgage
bonds, $4SO27.3O; deposit to sinking fund,
$40, 600, or $104. 293. 80
"Since ascertainment OF what are reason
able charges to the public requires elimina-
ton of unnecessary expense, the sum OF
$1O8. 2O5. ~ paid for instrument rentals and
switchboard ROYALTIES must be stricken out
for 1t is abundantly established that instru-
ments may be purchased outright at little
| more than the annual rental paid by this
company. and that swttchboards may be
purchased from any OF many manufac-
| turers without royalties No.5.rentals or
| royalties are paid in Europe or Canada,
| and none are exacted by the many manu-
factnrers in this country other than the
people does not require that the defendant
| shall deal exclusively with the Western