Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-03-26
BUSINESS TELEPHONES
A Proposed Amendment Reg
ulating Rates for Them.
STATED TO COMMITTEE
OPPOSING ARGUMENTS By THE
TELEPHONE PRESIDENT.
The c. and P. Company Opposed to
the Regulation of Bust
ness Rates.
STATED TO COMMITTEE

The discussion of the telephone rate ques-
ton in the Senate yesterday afternoon did
not touch in any way upon the difference
between the residential and the business use
OF the telephones in the District. The House
amendment to the appropriation bill. restat-
ing the old rates prescribed in 1898, limited
that restriction to residences and public
service telephones, leaving the business
rates underlined. The Senate committees
amendment to the substitute for the House
provision likewise limited the restriction to
public-service and residence phones and
omitted all reference to the business use of
the system. The Senate committee, how
ever, had Before it a definite proposition in
tended to carry the reform as to rates along
the whole line of the telephone use includ-
ing the business phones. This was present.
ed by Mr. j. ]. Hemphill as attorney for
one of the largest telephone users in the
District This amendment read as follows:
Provided, that the above rates and no
more may be charged or collected by any
such telephone company for the use of
telephone in private residence, and SO
and no more may be charged collected
for the use of a telephone in business
house.
Private Exchanges.
But a charge may be made and col
1ected for the use of telephone connected
with and forming a part of private ex-
change at rates not exceeding $40, and for
the rates to be charged and collected as
above specified unlimited service shall be
furnished.
'These shall be annual rates, and shall
be applicable to any and every kind or
form of telephone, whether now in or
hereafter adopted and whether connected
by or with wire, made of copper, steel,
iron o. other substance or whether oper-
q n or a1 cir
or with the single or double wire.
Forfeiture.
ANY violation of the above provisions
fixing the amounts to be charged or coll
lected for the use of a telephone shall
work forfeiture of all right ard authority
to conduct a telephone business in the Dis
trict of Columbia by the person or COM
pany so violating said provisions or any of |
them; and it shall be the duty of the Com |
miSSionerS of the District of Columbia to |
declare said forfeiture and to enforce the |
same in any manner or by any means nee |
essary to prevent said person or company |
from continuing to conduct telephone |
business in said District; and further. it |
shall be the duty of said Commissioners |
to prosecute or defend in the courts any |
legal proceedings necessary to enforce the |
above provisions relating to the use of |
telephones And to enforce the forfeiture |
of the right to carry a telephone bust
ness and to protect by all legal means the |
rights of the District of Columbia and |
the citizens thereof against any violation |
of the law relating to telephone com MES |
in said District
New Company.
I'm the event said Commissioners shall |
declare a forfeiture of the right of any |
person or telephone company to conduct |
the telephone business in the District of |
Columbia they shall be then fully en-
nowprad RI otb fa,o
company to construct suitable plant and |
conduct a telephone business in the District /
of Columbia Provided Said company shall |
first give bond to the District of Columbia |
in such reasonable sum the Commission |
erS shall determine, with surety or sureties
to be approved by the Commissioners and |
conditioned to save harmless the District |
of Columbia in the construction and MAIN |
tenance of it's plant, and to comply with |
the laws relating to telephone service and |
telephone charges in said District"
The committee did not adopt that amend-
ment, but adopted instead the change to the
$50 and S4S rates relating strictly to resi- /
Dental and public service telephones In |
urging his proposition upon the committee !
Mr.. Hemphill said that he wanted the |
law to fix the rate for business houses even |
as high 500, rather than leave the rate !
open as now for the company to shift at |
will
Proposition Opposed.
This proposition opposed at the time
by Mr.. u. N. Bethel, president of the c. |
and P. Telephone Company, who argued |
that the contention for a fiat top rate was |
not a subject for discussion He contended |
that if the fiat rate was fixed the small |
user would have to come up in his pay
ments to enable the company to do bust |
ness at a profit He declared that the !
adoption of such amendment would !
stop all progress on the part of the COM |
pany The fiat rate for unlimited service |
now he explained. is $125, one on a line
The $48 Rate Under Test
Mr. Bethel explained to the committee at
this same time that the company was then |
experimenting with new rate of $4S for |
two parties line unlimited. That is |
the second rate named in the amendment |
returned by the committee. The average !
cost of the telephone service, he said has |
been reduced from s96 to about $40 One |
statement made by him to the committee |
bore upon the policy of the company with I
reference to the multiple party and the linz
tied service systems. He said
at would have been unfortunate to adopt |
those rates which have the history they /
have had for the past five years. Recog-
nizing. of course, that Congress has the
right to fix the rates. | should think that ii
some proper limitation should be put upon
the area and some rates reasonably close
to those l have suggested as now being in
force adopted, of course the company would I
have to accept them and abide by them
However. l think there should be no three