Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-02-16

| want to take up with you the situa-
ton of the Individual who has rela-
tons With the telephone company.
IF you will examine with me the laws
to which | have here made reference,
going back to 1888. you will find there
is conferred upon companies having
through telephone lines absolute and
unlimited power to locate its lines and
select Its routes through any munici-
pality. 1t is mandatory upon the
governing bodies of such municipalities
to grant rights OF way upon applica-
ton. No such power is conferred upon
local telepilsne companies. You will
see, therefore, hat the local company
is at the mercy of the through COM
panies.
1T was said when the constitution
ality of the particular act granting
such power was tested that the COM
pany put its property to public use,
therefore 1t was constitutional for the
Legislature to grant such corporations
the power of eminent domain When
the State confers such powers 1t puts
such companies under a different obli-
cation than those that have 1t nos.
1t is the duty of such a company to
give uniformly fair treatment to all
the people. such a company has no
right to exact charges that will return
more than a reasonable profit above
investment.
Mr.. Sommer took exception at the
very outset to the attitude of the at
torney-general's department. He con-
tended that the encouragement ala
have power to conduct such an inquiry
as is asked for and cited, by way OF
confirmation of his statement, a de-
cision in the Court of Errors and APP
beals in the case Of McCarter VS.. Fire
Insurance Company.
AttorDey-Generai's Power.
That decision commended Mr..
Sommer, made the very plain state
ment thai where there is an excess of
corporate power the attorney general
shall have the right to take action,
Now. why can't that decision be APP
piled to this case, and thereby en1oin
this from continuing lts
exaetion of charges? They tell us that
we have competition in Newark, and
refer to another company there. Yes,
we have another company, but that's
about all you can say about 1t.
IF you decide to investigate, 1T may
be well to inquire into the relationship
that exists between the two companies.
See how many directors of the local
are interested in the through
and then take q look at the
conduits of the local company. II
Won find in those conduits the wires
of the borough company, will you then
say that there is not some connection
between them? Will you say Their that
the proper degree of competition eX-
lists? The through company puts up
the plea that it has competition In the
shape of the local company. If that's
true. why don't they AXE over the
local company"
Mr.. Sommer then went on to point
out the disparity that exists in the
rates charged COR telephone service in
Newark and vicinity with those that
prevail in other large cities of the
country. He called attention to the
fact that the rate in Newark is S22S,
whereas in Buffalo it is $S4, in Roches-
ter s4S. in Syracuse $50, in Reading
$50. in Cincinnati 800, in Pittsburg
$125. in st. Joseph $50. in Providence
$50, in Minneapolis $50, in st. Louis $50.
and in Milwaukee 500.
''These figures declared Mr.. SOM
mer. "do not represent mere idle state
ments. They are ~substantiated by COM
munications received from the Mayors
or city clerks of the several munich
p~alities named. This evidence, it
seems to me, makes out a prima facie
case against the company. ] honestly
feel that it is high time the Legis-
lature stepped in and did something
to relieve this condition of things and
not leave the people of North Jersey to
the mercy of these companies"
Mr.. Sommer's argument was
scarcely a. fair presentation of facts
declared Mr.. Bethel, especially during
the latter part of it. For instance. he
named 1928 as the rate that is charged
for telephone service in Newark and
vicinity. AS a matter of fact, we have
exactly two subscribers today out of
almost &c, 1000 who pay $22S for their
telephone service. We nave only thirty
two subscribers who pay over $3.50 a
year. We have only 243 who pay over
500 a year. There are 1863 business
houses that pay us s48 or less a year,
and over 5000 residence phones yield
us but $50 a year. This means that in
stead of 1928 a "a average rate we
receive for telephone service, we ac-
tually get blu $4S.31.
Nov, 1 want these figures to be fully
appreciated. This $43.31 means the aver
age that is struck after we have totaled
every source of revenue to us through
the use of our telephones. 1t includes
the private lines. party lines, private
branch exchanges, pay stations, etc.
l have found this average after in
vestigating the receipts of the company
during the year 1909"
Admits High Rate.
There was an outburst of laughter
when in reply to Senator Ackerman's
question Mr.. Bethel admitted that the
rate of $4S a year. he had so glibly cited
paid for one wire and limited the mes
sages sent over it to a little over one a
day, the actual cost being eight cents
per local message, other messages being
charged for at the rate of five cents
each. That is a rate far in excess of
anything dug up before. 1t is higher
than that of 1928 per year for ZOO mes
sages and tops anything found in other
cities. Its injustice is shown when it is
considered + the company charges
five cents per local message in its own
pay stations.
There developed a little tilt between
Mr.. Bethel and Mr.. Sommer. The
former insinuated that Mr.. Sommer's
figures regardings Rochester were not
accurate. Mr.. Sommer promptly resent
- NJ Dn4t-4lI lnr4