The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1909-08-10
OKLAHOMA CITY RATE
RAISE CAUSE OF ACTION
Company Insists on Charging
Excess Rate Despite Boards
Order to DeSiSt


before the corporation commission on
the complaint case Of John hurrows
of Oklahoma City vs.. the Piol Aer
telephone company. in which the
defendant is charged with violating
an order of the corporation commls-
sion by raising its telephone rates
without first having secured permis-
siCn from the commission, John NJ +.
Noble, general manager of the com
pany stated upon the witness stand
in response TO an inquiry that the
company had been collecting the new
rate since the citation order had
been served on the officials by the
commission and that the company in
tended to continue TO collect the new
rate. which he declared il had q
right to collect under its oklahoma
City franchise until estopped by the
commission, and then would take lhe
matter into court, having given an
indemnity bond to the oklahoma city
officials to insure the return OF the
excessive rate charged should the
courts determine that the rates now
charged are not permissible under
the franchise.
Assistant Attorney General Hen
shaw raised the point during the
hearing that the Oklahoma city tran
chise made in 1906 was void as 1t
contained no limitation as to the life
Of the franchise
s. H. Harris counsel for the tele-
phone company, asserted that the
Oklahoma City officials had conceded
that the ordinance was valid but
when City Attorney Tw ford Of Ok
lahoma City was called upon he de-
clned to affirm the statement and
declared that that was one of the
grounds upon which he would file an
Injunction suit in the Oklahoma City
court to restrain the company from
collecting 1he present rates. The
other gromSs he stated, We're that
the company did not have the re-
quired number of phones in use in
Oklahoma City TO collect the pres
ent rate if the ordinance is valid;
also that the company is without au-
thoritY to raise the rates without
getting permission from the commits
sion. H. claimed that the Pioneer
company had counted all telephone
room phones. private PIX phones,
etc, to claim 5000 phones in order
to collect the new rate.
Corp Eatiog Commissioner Meal
ester stated that because the Oklah0
ma City officials had not come to the
commission for relief on the new
rates charged in violation Of the
commissions order and because the
city and the Pioneer company had ar
ranged that the latter give an in
Identifying bond as assurance that
tho excess rate now being charged
would be refunded to customers
should the courts hold that the com.
pany did not have enough phones in
Oklahoma City to collect the new
rate. il seemed to him that the city
ana the telephone company had
formed an agreement to ignore the
order of the commission and to set
tie the matter in the courts. This
was denied by bOth the Pioneer
company representatives and City
Attorney Twyford.
The only defense put up by the
telephone company in violating the
order Of the commission was that
the officials did not believe, under
the decision of the supreme court IN
the Hartshcrne case. the order OF
the commission would auple TO Okla
hCma City and that the franchise
should regulate the rates. Chairman
Jack Love repeatedly called the Pi
oneer company representatives dOwr
during the hearing for attempting tC
Hcod the record with a lot of evi
dence which he said was immaterial
stating that the pecple were getting
tired Of these lengthy judicial opin
ions. and that it was quick relic
that they wanted and that was wha
the commission would endeavor t
give them. II seemed TO him tha
the evidence was conclusive as t
the guilt of the company in violat
ing the order of the commission.
Other Contempt Cases Heard.
The contempt case against the NJ
X. and T. Railroad company, filet
bv Jesse w ~atts of Sallisaw whit
charged that the agent at Bantlesvill
had violated the orders of the com
mission in not bulletining the arriva
of trains and in not providing drink
ing water in the depot Mr. Watt
testified that himself and wife ha
been kept waiting at the depot on
hot day last month from II a. m. III
al : p. m. waiting for q train due I
arrive at 11:25 a. m. the agent tel
ing them that the train would arriy