Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1906-05-16
Judge Ramsay Restraints
City From Destroying
Telephone Property.
STANDING ON CONTRACT
Council Had Right to Grant IL
cense---Has Not Power to
Terminate Contract.

Judge ramsay this afternoon order
| ed an injunction to issue against the
city of Rock Island restraining the of
ficers from destroying the property of
the Central Union Telephone company.
The company can now proceed with its
work of installing telephones. An ap-
peal is taken TO the appellate court, a
bond being furnished indemnifying
against damages.
On account of the urgent appeal of
the company for an early decision in
the matter. the court did not prepare a
written opinion. but covered his views
of the case orally.
Law In Sufficient.
The first subject touched upon was
the law governing telegraph companies,
which he said he believed was and is
sufficient to authorize the city to Ii
cense the telephone company to plan,
poles in the streets in 1887. as il did
do. He said that the proper term in
this case is that the city granted a IL
cense. When the telephone company
expended a considerable amount OF
money in the setting of poles and
stringing of wires, it became a con
tract, the terms of which are fixed by
the ordinance itself. When the city
used the poles of the company for the
stringing of police patrol wires. it with
out question became a contract. which
could not be terminated by either party
especially the city.
Not Special Privilege.
Upon the question of special privi-
lege the court held that no special priv
ilege was granted to the telephone COM
pany. IF it had been an exclusive
right" he said. that would have been
special privilege, but it is only one of
general privileges
Dealing with the question of control
over the corporation, he said that the
cross bill alleged that the contract i'm
piled that the charges must be reason
able. He said that the question of the
rights of the city to regulate is involv-
ed. but that he was not called upon to
pass upon that matter at this time
Court Decides as to Cause.
1t was held by the court that if the
city is to annul or terminate that CON
tract, it must be for cause, and that
cause is a judicial matter. The council
can not sit as judges as to what is
good cause for the termination of such
a contract. The cause must be shown
in open. court with a hearing to all
parties.
Upon the question of the city annul-
ing contract by simply saying that
the rates are eXOrbitant, he held that
rates of telephone company must be
fixed in a general ordinance and not in
special cases. ~:..r.s
AS to the affidavits with reference to
service and the planting of poles and
other things. of which scores were sub
mitted. he said that all of the attorneys
know that the most unsatisfactory kind
of evidence is the affidavit, and he did
not attempt to judge between the two
sides OF these cases, which would I'M
doubtedly come into court at some flu
ture time in another form.
Given Full Amount.
In the case of DR.. E. NJ. Sala VS.. the
administrator of the estate of Jane
Weatherhead, the plaintiff was award
ed the full amount 1926 by the jury,
the result being the same as that of
the trial in the county court The al
legation was that the deceased aunt
agreed to pay for the operation upon
Edna Gale H. A. Weld was attorney
for the plaintiff and .Kenworthy &
Kenworthy appeared for the defend
ant.
Holds With Krnn. ~
Judge Ramsay also decided the suit
of William Case. ct al, VS.. William
Kran in favor of the defendant, the Cir
cumstances being as follows:
In 1888 II. III. Beardsley made deed
to Louden Case, which contained the
following clause: "Beardsley reserving
one-half of the coal NINE Case and
Case, the plaintiffs being the sons of
Louden Case, conveyed the property by
deed containing the following clause:
Except one-half the coal thereon"
and Kran, the defendant, obtained title
by deed containing clause similar to
the last one. Kran then obtained
deed from the heirs of Fl. II. Boards
ley to the interest in the coal reserved
by him. Case and Case claimed that
the reservation in the Beardsley deed
was void and that their reservation
was the first and only valid reserva-
ton. They first began suit in the
county court and Judge Parmenter de-
cided in favor of Case and Case. Kran
took an appeal to the appellate court
where the case was reversed without
remanding.
Case and Case then began a suit in
chancery in the circuit court. Judge