The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-03-19
ARGUM ENTS
FOR CITY
Were Commenced by A. {.
Helm Yesterday.
HAVE JUST BEGUN
Two More of City's Attorneys
Will Make Arguments Today.

For four hours and a half yesterday
City Attorney ~ E. Helm read law and
argued before Judge Rogers of the United
States circuit court why the Missouri and
Kansas Telephone company should be or
dered to take their poles and wires off
the streets of Wichita. For months Mr..
Helm and his assistants have been work
ing on the arguments and it was shortly
after ten o'clock yesterday morning when
r. r. vermilion, attorney for complain
ants. completed the opening argument.
Judge Helm Immediately took the floor
to begin the reply and argument for
the city. Many who heard the argu-
ments yesterday say that it was the best
work OF the kind Mr.. Helm ever did. He
threw his whole soul into the argument,
and before he had spoken more than
few sentences every one in the court room
knew that the speaker was III earnest in
every word he said, and that the clear
and logical argument. delivered in an
impressive manner, was Mr.. Helms best
effort
Mr.. Helm opened his speech with an
Swers to the contentious of the company.
The company claimed that they were
operating an improved style of telegraph
system and congress has given tele-
graph company rights TO use post roads
and highways of the country. Congress
has taken no such official action in re-
gard to telephone lines, according to the
city's answer and Mr.. Helm read the
decision of the United States supreme
court in a decision similar to this one.
in which il was held that a telephone
line is not a telegraph line and has no
more right to use the streets of a town
except with the permission of the citi-
Zens.
a state law, passed in 1850, is entitled
an act to form telephone companies and
in another chapter confers some of the
powers of telegraph companies on tele-
phone lines The city attorney claimed
that this law was unconstitutional in
that 1t was not legal law, from the
fact that the title says TO form tele
phone companies, but does not say any
thing about comforting any powers on
such a company.
Even if this law was constitutional, the
city attorney claimed that the rights of
cities must be respected, because a law
passed in 1881 gave them the right to say
what companies could operate lines on
the streets. The law giving the city the
power to control its own streets was
passed prior to the law authorizing the
formation of telephone companies.
The telephone company claimed that
they were operating in this city under an
ordinance granted the United Telephone
company. and the Missouri and Kansas
Telephone company purchased this ordi-
nance when they obtained control of the
property of the United Telephone com
pany. The city's attorneys claimed that
this ordinance was only for fire alarm
service and did not give the company
full rights on the streets.
IL =
souri, and Kansas Telephone company. IN
til a short time ago. did not consider
the ordinance granted many years ago
in effect now. Mr. Helm produced records
showing that later ordinances granted
the Missouri and Kansas Telephone com
pany had been accepted and in each Of
these ordinances il was stated that all
prior ordinances had been repealed. Fur
Their along this line Mr. Helm argued
that as the company had asked for new
franchises and from this fact he
claimed that the company did not believe
the old ordinance was i'm effect.
Taking up the acts of the city regard
ing this matter. Mr.. Helm claimed that
the city had offered the company a fran
chise a little more than a year ago. in
which were provisions which II was
thought was reasonable and necessary for
the protection of the city and citizens.
The company had refused 10 accept such
franchise. but another company accepted
one identical with il.
Mr. Helm then took up the action Of
the company, claiming that the company
had refused to obey the laws of the city
and had been repea teddy arrested and
fined and that the men would go TO work
Immediately on release from jail in dis
obeying the orders Of the city council.
From the stipulations produced in court,
Mr.. Helm argued that on July 81 last
the directors Of the Missouri and Kansas
Telephone company. incorporated under
the laws of the state of Missouri. had
passed a resolution asking the old Col
ony Trust company to become plaintiff
10 the suit. and the telephone company
would pay ali the costs. on that same
day. in the minutes of the directors meet
ing. was found a release transferring TO
the Missouri and Kansas Telephone com
pany all leases and property of the COM
pany Incorporated under the laws ~
Missouri Both Of these commands were
Incorporated q the same time. about lSs7.
but Mr. Helm claimed that the company
organized in Kansas had been extinct
as far as business was concerned as the
Missouri company transacted all affairs
until the release last July. Mr. Helm
claimed that the Old Colony Trust com
pany was brought into the suit in order
10 have "A non resident plaintiff. and that
llt EFiftt>f Nar Elt4F N NfutE 70 nave
a company organized In Kansas TO oper-
ate the property as only companies or
gained under the laws OF this state were
entitled 20 the privileges & tho act passed
in IsS5.
AR Helm. during his arguments yes
teriay. read many pages from opinions
and records touching on cases of this
kind
This morning Mr. Ashhaueh viii begin
his argument and viii De followed by M
Smythe. The city argument VIII Be
completed r>lortiv afr noon today. when
c. Y Ferguson "a Judge Gates for
the telephone company. viii - gin their
closing arguments for the couplai MS.
II ts possible shat this case may o. I'm
ished by this evening. but IL is expected
that L viii require q short session 70
morrow morning
As soon IS this case Is completed. tho
CERTAIN RESULTS