Daily new dominion. [volume] (Morgantown, W. Va.) 1897-1906, 1903-06-11
ANOTHER SIDE,
Mr.. p w. Low Rises to Make
q Few Remarks.

Tells his Side Of the Story Which DIFF
fers Materially From Statements
Made by Mr. GapeI Holland Reasons
for Disruption Of Agreement Be.
tween Telephone Companies.
To The Editor Of the New DOMINION.
7 notice in a recent issue OF your
valuable paper in regard to the disa-
greement between the Peoples Tel Co
and The Monongahela Valley that
number Of erroneous statements are
made, soome Of which refer to me di-
rectly. In order that the public may
know the true state of affairs. / de-
sire space in yonr paper for the pur-
pose Of making short statement rela-
tive To the same. Mr. Holland ia his
interview says s'that his company had
refused connections Ilonger because we
had refused to pay the exchange rate
agreed upou which was scots per
quarter for each phone the bill reach
ing twenty five dollars in default of
Payment he had refused further SER
vice etc. In this he is incorrectly
quoted or he makes an erroneous state
ment as there never was an exchange
rate agreed upon between Us at Scots
per quarter neither is there a contract
between US either verbal or written in
which we arc to pay his company one
cent FOR exchange and further he is
not offering it TO US now at scots per
quarter. The PEOPLES Telephone Co.
are granting mutual exchange Of
service to like concerns no larger than
Us aud lying in contiguous territory
viz. The Farmers Telephone Co. az
Pit. Marion, the lines of Mr.. Long
at Mt Morris, the Wadestown Tele
phone Co and to the little exchange
at Blacksville. They are not only
giving a mutual exchange but actual
ly pay sum monthly for connection
to this day if the Pennsylvania who
is selected for the purpose has
not purchased it out right. Why
should the Peoples Telephone Co dis
eliminate against the Monongahela
Valley? During the early fall of 1902
in a conversation with Mr.. Holland
he informed me that his company
could no longer give US a mutual eX-
change Of service over all his lines as
we were too small, etc. as he says in
his interview. Later / approached
him on the subject OF traffic ar
rangement and he deferred the matter
saying that we would attend to 1t
when he got Strengthened out as he
was building line to Fairmont at
the time.
Thus matters stood until about the
middle ofM arch when without notice
or previous intimation he severed our
connections. Later he sent us the
nucleus Of an agreement which was
unsatisfactory to US in many ways as
it would neccesitate the building of a
line to their one horse exchange at
Laurel Point and last but not least
contained a provision in which they
could rescind the agreement on short
notice. l called npon their attorney
in person and pointed out these Oh
jectionable features and laid before
a proposition alike fair to all PARTIES
but up to the time that Mr.. Holland
managed to get himself interviewed
| have heard nothing from him. Now
in regard to the further comment III
the article referred to about our duty
to our county will say that we are
as loyal asany citizen In it and as
alive as to its interests and we think
that is no fault of ours that the hard
dollars of Onr community are going to
an other county neither am | surprls-
ed at tho attitude of the people all
over county toward the Peoples Tele-
phone Co when director Of the COM
pany says publicly 'If could have
my own way | would cut the country
lines off at the bridge. II have refused
''phoneS" to people who wanted Nor
gantown knowing the uncertain guam
ity and quality Of our friends, of the
Modern Athens and his liability to
change his spots remembering also
what sent the Morgantown & Dells-
low Co. to the Bell. | Will allow an
unprejudiced public to judge between
US.
Yours Resp,
p. w. Low.