The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-10-10
ARGUMENT in GAS CASE
1T is HEARD by JUDGE NEAL, OF
HAMILTON CIRCUIT COURT.
The City of Indfanap polls Represented
by City Attorney joss and Others
Conclusion To-day.

The preliminary hearing of the suit of the
City of indianapolis against the Indianap-
oils Gas Company, asking for an injunction
to prevent the gas company from discontin-
uance of the supply of gas to its Indianap-
oils consumers, came up before Judge John
+. Neal in the Hamilton County Circuit
Court at Noblesville yesterday. The argu-
ment OF the attorneys in the case and the
submission of affidavits by residents of
Indianapolis as to the ability of the COM
pany to supply its consumers If il cared to
do so, and affidavits by employees of the
gas company to the effect that the COM
pany is unable to furnish gas, occupied
the attention of the court during the day.
Frederick Joss city attorney. made brief
statement to Judge Neal, in which he out
lined the cause of the city and briefly told
of the ability of the gas company to COM
ply with the wishes of a majority of the
residents Of Indianapolis in supplying the
fuel. He stated that the overtures made
by the company to the city in the spring
of this year and it's efforts to assist In the
passage of an ordinance permitting of the
sale of gas by meter proved conclusive
ly that the company has the gas to sell,
and the court should compel it to dispose
that the gas company in accepting the
fiat rate paid for gas in effect entered into
contract with the city and should not be
allowed to break it at will.
The city of Indianapolis was represented
in the suit by Mr. Joss and Assistant City
Attorney L. D. HAY and w. r. Fertig of
Noblesville, and the gas company by Chief
Counsel Ferdinand Winter, ex-Judge Theo-
dore T. Davis, of Indianapolis, and Cassius
Greenlee, of Elwood.
THE MAYORS AFFIDAVIT.
Among the affidavits submitted for the
consideration of the court by the city
that of Mayor Bookwalter. in which he
described fuel conditions in Indianapolis
and the inconvenience the turning off of
the gas supply would work in the COM
munity. He said that the scarcity of coal
and other fuels due to the strike In the
the anthracite region. the impossibility of
a change in fuel because of the construc-
ton or the fues in houses of the city and
the probability of much suffering from
lack or gas made it imperative that the
supply OF gas be not discontinued. In the
other affidavits residents of Indianapolis
and consumers of the Indianapolis Gas
Company stated that the supply of gas
now is as great as 1t ever has been in re-
cent years and the pressure is equally as
great as at any other time since the de-
crease in the flow of gas became appar-
ply gas was the statement of many of the
affidavits.
The counter affidavits of the defense were
MADE by me employees of the gas company
the consideration of the court In them
the gas company employees stated that the
pressure is lower now than ever before and
that the engines and pumps of the COM
pany are being run at their highest ca
paclty to increase the supply, but without
avail and that the pressure as shown in
ia Nun
strates that the supply is nearly exhausted
In the company's fields. One of the affida-
Wits was by John r. Pearson, resident
manager of the indianapolis Gas Company,
and in 1T he furnished figures showing the
number Of pounds of gas flowing through
the mains at the present time and COM
pared them with figures gathered when
gas was more plentiful In his affidavit
Mr.. Pearson stated that many of the men
who signed the affidavits presented to the
court by the city were not on the books of
the company as consumers, others lived in
districts In Indianapolis where houses were
supplied from igh-pressure feed mains and
others In the vicinity of regulators, and
that the supply of gas which they received
could not be taken a correct Indication
of what all of the consumers Of the city
received.
ARGUED FOR INJUNCTION.
After the aff1davits had been considered
Assistant City Attorney Day, for the city
of Indianapolis, made a short statement
ton. He said that he could not see any
reason why the gas company should refuse
to sell gas to its consumers at the same
rate that it always has received, If the
people wanted it, whether the company has
the gas or not. If the company made money
by selling gas for years, why should it
care to stop selling ii now at the same
rate, unless 1t had gas which could be sold
at higher rate In other places? The at
tn he
passage OF the meter ordinance in Indian
apolis proved that the company is willing
to dispose OF It's gas in Indianapolis If 1t
can secure higher rate for it. He said
that when the gas company was working
for the passage of this ordinance the
councilmen were assured that the passage
or the ordinance would proong the life
of gas for the city and would insure 1t as
fuel for four or five years to come.
Mr. Hay argued that If the gas company
is not bound by its contract with the
city to supply the gas and can cut off the
supply when IL sees fit, what use would
there have been in the passage of meter
ordinance, which would be binding on the
city's side only and the company could turn
the supply of whenever il saw fit TO do so
or whenever its gas could be sold at a
greater profit in other territory?
All OF the argument will be heard by
Judge Neal before noon to-day and Ii Is
expected that he will take the case under
mornings session of court Ferdinand Win
ter will make the principal argument for
The gas company and will be followed by
his assistant, Mr.. Davis Mr. Joss will
close the citys side of the case
The temporary restraining order issued
by Judge feathers in the Marion County
Superior Court expires to-day, but the
counsel for the city was assured by Mr.
Winter that the gas would not be turned
on as long as the case is being heard by
Judge Neal. He told the city attorneys
that there is no need of a continuance
OF the order by Judge Neal as the gas
company does not care to take advantage
of a technicality to discontinue the sale