The San Francisco call., 1908-10-11
City Attorney Long Says Spring
Valley Can Not Collect In
creased Charges
Consumer May Pay, but Is Safe
guarded by Impounding
of Money
Officials of Monopoly Prepare to
Make Attempt to Enforce
New Schedule

Although the Spring Valley water
company is busy with its preparations
to collect an increase of Is per cent
over the legal rate, the rate payers
under the decision of Judge Earring
ton, as interpreted by City Attorney
Long, are under no compulsion to pay
the excess. The company may tender
its bills, but the rate payer has the
right to refuse to pay any sum above
the existing schedule. Supervisor
Murphy expressed an opinion on this
point yesterday which comedies with
that entertained by the city attorney
The entire matter will be brough,
to climax in a. few weeks, when the
Spring Valley company will attempt to
corporation threatens to shut off the
water Of any consumer who declines to
pay the extra charge, but the con-
sumner may retaliate with an injunction
against any interference with his
water supply Such proceeding would
determination for the guidance of all
the rate payers of the city.
While the attorneys of the company
continue to insist that they are at lib
erty to add 15 per cent to the existing
charges, City Attorney Long maintains
that the language of the decision is
too explicit to admit of doubt. He
relies on article 10 TO sustain his con-
tention. This article reads as follows:
Nothing herein contained shall be
SO construed as. to require any GUS
toner or purchaser of water to pay
charges for water which may be made
by said company, or to pay any bills
rendered in excess Of the rates fixed
in said ordinance, provided, that IL any
customer or customers pay a higher
rate. the difference between the
amount so paid and the amount which
would be paid If said ordinance re-
mained in full force and effect, shall
be impounded as hereinbefore pro-
vided."
Long said that only one construction
could be placed on those words.
There can be no question as to the
meaning of that section" said Long.
1T states as clearly as it could pos
sibly be stated that no consumer is
required to pay anything in excess OF
the rates fixed by the board of super
visors- I believe that the rights of all
parties concerned are safeguarded by
the provision that requires the COM
pany to himpound the excess This Of
flee wilIs neither advise the consumers
to pay or not to pay the excess. It
will be the province 3f each consumer
to follow his own Judgment. 1t is not
within my authority to take up the
cases of the consumers, but this Of
flee must be prepared at any time to
advise the city authorities on it's in
depreciation Of the decision"
PURPOSE OF ARTICLE
'I am told that the company believes
IL has the right to force the collection
of the 15 per cent increase. / do not
see how it arrives at that conclusion.
For what purpose then did Judge Far
rington insert article 10? 1t is evil
dent on the face of the decision that
his purpose was clear. He did not
insert it just to fill space. He meant
to convey some definite idea. The con-
tention of the water companys attor-
neys would be all right If article 10
had been omitted. 1t in no way affects
any other part of the decision and could
have been eliminated altogether unless
the judge desired to Convey some new
idea; unless he intended to cover some
point that he had not touched before.
Assured that he wrote that article
with a definite purpose, what was that
purpose? 1t was to protect the con-
right of the consumer. The
language is plain.
Had the judge intended to make a
sweeping order In favor of the corpora
ton, he would have followed the prac-
tice of calling in the attorneys for the
and wording the order to filI
All the requirements of the occasion
But 1T is plain that he did not intend
to make sweeping order in favor of
Spring Valley. and for that reason he
Inserted article 10, which has modi- /
tying effect on the entire Injunction
and provides explicitly that the con-
sumer is not required to pay anv ex
cess charge. The consumer may nav
f he desires, knowing that his interests
will be safeguardeds by the impoundfng
II the money, but If the rate paver
choose it would appear that he need not
pay.
las to the city's water bills. have
not yet decided what recommendation
% make in case / am asked for an
opinion. The company can not. under
he law, cut off the city's water sun
ply"
Supervisor Murphy said that the
'OQII > OPlIliOu was 50 clear that ha 4
vas unable to see that there could ba
my doubt.
1T states positively and clearlv,,
aid Murphy, that the consumer is not
equired to pay above the ordinance
ate. That is all there is to IT..
AS far as the city itself is concerned
he budget provisions will not admit
Il the payment of the Is per cent axe
ess. The allowance for water for tba
-ear has been fixed and can not now
'e changed. By the rate schedule
Iisors the city's water bill was exts-
mated at s176,000 for. the fiscal vear
nd an allowance for this sum u,as
made in the. budget The $I76.0oo a. |.
made up of the following: $12o. 900 for
ydrants. 100000 for public buildings.