The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1910-02-26
PHONE PROPERTY
BELONGS TO CITY
Peoples Company Forfeited Equip
ment IN Streets By Sale To Rival,
Corporation Counsel Says.

Corporation Counsel Hally has com
pleted legal opinion in which he
advises the common council that the
city may by legal proceedings gain
possession OF the S350.O00 worth OF
property ia the streets and alleys
which was sold By Arthur Pack az
trustee for the People Telephone
60, 10 the Michigan state Telephone
Co, the ID. L.. X. and others.
The Peoples Telephone Co. fran
chlsc contained clause whereby the
property was to become forfeited 10
the city in case of sale to the Bell In
teresis or in case the property should
be so conducted as To impair or de-
stroy competition in the use OF teie-
phones.
Mayor Breitmeyer some time ago
sent a message to the council. adVis-
ing that the city make use OF TINS Tor
feiture clause TO gain possession Oh
the property The mayor also made
some other suggestions which Haliy
does not approve.
The corporation counsel states
that the city can not install muni-
cipal switchboard and compel conf
munication between the Bell ami
Home companies on this exchange
unless the two companies agree there
ny, or unless an elaborate scheme ot
legislation Is devised whereby the
right OF all parties would be guarded.
He holds. also, that ii Is doubtful II
me city can by ordinance regulate
telephone rates, although he admits
that II might be possible TO do so IN
connection with general ordinance
governing all future extension or
telephone Service Such thing Is
advised against at this time.
Several pages of the communica-
ton are given over 70 the ques-
ton OF forfeiture of the old People >
Telephone Co. property. Cases or
similar nature are reviewed and com
nented ON. ana the history Of the
granting of the Peoples franchise. the
financial troubles OF the company and
its final dissolution and sale Of its
property are narrated.
Referring 10 the deed bv which
Pach conveyed conduts, poles. etc,
~ the Michigan state Telephone Co.,
disclaiming any responsibility To the
city therein Tally says: And so
those parties by a polite fiction, at
tempt To rid themselves OF the con
sequences of the ordinance passed ny
he city Of Detroit. which came into
the hands OF ;he Peoples Telephone
Co.
Here We had contract solemnly
entered into which in express terms
provides that If this property passed
iuto the hands of a competing tele-
phone company that by that act 1t
was forfeited 10 the city OF Detroit,
and the full penal sum of bond In
addition should come 20 the city OF
Detroit nd the situation would seem
10 warrant the city in cuntending and
successfully contcnding. that the par
ties here having deliberately done
with the property what they were eN-
,rrssly forbidden 10 do with IL. that
with the proper legal procedure "
became and Is the property OF the
CITY of Detroit
If the city attempts TO possess IT.
self OF this property It can only do so
after long and well-fought litigation.
Unless the equivalent OF the value OF
the property in the shape OF com
pensation for It's use OF in reduced
telephone rates is given 10 the pub
III. the duty of the council is clear