Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1905-06-29

motion of Mr.. Catteli the matter OF prepar-
alton Of the advertisements was referred toI
the City Solicitor
On motion of Mr. Burkett, the street
committee was authorized to remedy the
condition Of the street at Edith and Wash
ington SITS.
The clerk was authorized to notify Rachel
Shields to pave in front Of her property
The clerk was directed to notify Property
owners on Evergreen ave. to pave, curb and
gutter at once, or the City will do so.
On motion Of Mr.. Cattell the Street COM
mittee was authorized to lay a five foot
side walk. curb and gutter along the east
front Of the Friendship Fire House on
Russell street.. Carried.
Previous to taking up the telephone fran
chse ordinance prepared by the Del. and
At. Tel. and Tel. Co.. Mr.. Starr, their
counsel, was granted privilege Of the floor,
and reviewed the history Of telephone
legislation in this city. He said tele-
phone system was first established here IN
1888, by the South Jersey Telephone Com
pany, that secured franchise to erect
poles on all the streets Of the city, and
since that time had continuously done bus
mess here. In 1862 general ordinance
was enacted and accepted by the phone
company, and map Of their system in the
city was fled with Council Five free
phones were installed, as required BY the
ordinance, and from time to time plans of
extensions were fled They did, how
ever, make some extensions without per-
mission, but those occurred after changes
took place in the management and we're
not made in a spirit Of avoiding any law Of
the city
The new franchise ordinance has some
features that the Company cannot accept,
namely that limiting the rental Of phones
to S12 per year; that requiring fifteen free
phones 80 firemen, and that limiting the
franchise to 20 years. The ordinance they
present and hope Council will pass has no
limitation as TO eostaf phones; it requires
the company to put in . extension bells to
hremen who have phones; provides for the
placing of a certain proportion Of the wires
under ground; there is also no limitation
to the duration Of the franchise.
Mr. Cattell, replying to Mr.. Starr, said
shat he found the S. Telephone Co, did
not accept the general ordinance Of 1902
and without authority had placed 70 poles
on twenty streets.
He then proceeded to attack all four pre-
positions OF the Company's ordinance,
Counsel says they have much valuable prop
erty here, he said, yet they pay under local
assessment only $50 per year. He owned
lot that was not earning anything, on
which he paid more tax than that. II
there was any law by which the city could
tax property Of these corporations he
wouldn't be so particular about some of the
provisions Of this ordinance, bnt they own
much valuable property and pay only a
trife in taxes The proposition to put the
wires under ground isn't so great a conces-
sion, he said, we are gradually making per
manent street improvements that cannot
be torn up.
He thought if these people had promptly.
complied with the ordinance, and come
here on time with smart lawyer, they
might have hoodwinked the Council, but
it Is too late now, we understand where we
are Those fifteen free phones we ask for
our fremen is really for police service; they
get M pay aud are subject to the call, Of
the Mayor on occasion of emergency duty.
Mr.. starr corrected Mr.. Cattell as to the
amount Of taxes paid by the Company, say
ing that ia addition to the payment he
stated they paid franchise tax Of S1l0.
ME-. Cattell retorted that on a valuation
Of s25, 900 they paid to the city only S170.
DR.. Reading left the chair and said he
could not see what relation fixing the
price of phones had to tightening the bur
den Of taxation to the general public. He
did not believe we had right TO fix the
price OF phones owned Dy inns company
Let us tax this company in a way to bring
revenue to the city. Business phones ought
so pay more than a residence phone.
The franchise is owned by all the people,
and those who own it have right to have
their share Of relief Fixing the toll for
use Of phones benefited only nsers of
phones, but gaYe no relief to the non-user
of phones.
Mr. Cattsll replied that some States
limited the rate Of fare to be charged pas
sengers, and the q. S. Supreme Court had
decided that rates fixed By law could not
pc exceeded. n some cities phone rentals
were only Sc a year.
This ended the discussion and the Clerk
proceeded to read the ordinance on second
reading when MI Cattell moved to strike