The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1911-10-24

yet Oeen JuOlCloly UctcA AAAC0 IA wv
state of Indiana where no limitation
ia fixed in franchise itself, and coun- |
sci were therefore compelled to search
in cases as elsewhere considered. and
at same time bear in mind the partic-
ular statutes involved; the rights OF
the municipalities in streets OF the
particular Jurisdiction in which the
question arose; also as based upon
the special contract construed as we'll
as rights granted to the Individual
corporation by state itself. Counsel
would not submit brief for the
very obvious reason that If this ques-
ton is not settled by some eventual
contract, the entire matter will be
sooner or later subjected to judicial
determination.
And counsel advised that franchise
is granted in 1885, expired July 10,
1908, some eleven years before max
ing 1892 contract; that on such date
July IS, 1903, the attempted extension
of the corporate life of the company
was ineffectual; that while city could
not question claimed extension so long
as 1892 contract with the city was not
finished, such question being alone for
the state, the present company Will
possess no franchise after October l.
1912, and no rights in the street other
than of q mere license cancellable at
will of city.
That the continuation Of right to
engage in supply to domestic and mu-
nicipal consumers must, therefore, be
by new franchise and new contract
engaged into by city, and owner OF
the water works system.
Answer to Question Two: The right
of the city to investigate the DOCKS
and into the affairs Of the present
company are such as are provided by
Section 54, Municipal Code Acts OF
1905. Such section being amended in
1909, but not amended was this sec
ton as to this particular. Under the
rights of the City by such section, the
city has heretofore made partial IN
vestigation and further it must be re-
membered that the final test comes
under this section in case OF retusai
of a company or individual to comply
with the demand of council for re-
view BY Wayne circuit court OF the
question of the rightfulness and legan-
ty of the demand under particular cir
cumstances. The right of investigation
APPLIES Into the affair of any corpora
ton, firm or person in which city may
| be interested or with which 1t may
have entered into a contract or may De
about to do So" In this instance the
city is not interested in present com
pany in such way as to allow 1t 70
INQUIRE and investigate as to matters
of present or heretofore, for the pur
poses other than hereinafter sent out
For so long as the present company's
present contract has not expired anc
the company fully complies with its
contractual obligations, the terms OF
the present contract are positive ane
fixed. And as to the present contract
the city enjoys no right OF investlga
ton for the purpose OF the presen
terms or present prices charged ethel
to the consumer or to the city. BY rea
son of the fact that the contract pro
vides as to the charges and how same
are to be made. When, however, thu
city makes contract with a person
and the terms of such contract provide
variable or changeable rate, or othe
provision changeable or amendaOi
from time to time, in such instance
to matters pertinent to such contract
the city may, from time to time, max
it's investigations and examinations
Such situations, however. is not pre-
scented in present status of affairs Wit
; the local company. Applied OF the pres
ent situation, the power of the city t
. examine or to Investigate. is not
, matter Of caprice or to satisfy curios
, Iity, nor to determine whether or not
contract heretofore made has resulte
in great profit or profits much IN e.
cess of those anticipated. And so tn
} City of Richmond has no power to II
vestigate the books of the presen
company unless the city is in receip
: of or has before it for considerable
l some proposition looking to the II
ture and to the future contract, whic
J., proposition the city is seriously col
sidering to the idea, perhaps of az
= cepting the same. And so accept TO
l the purpose of future contract, the cit
: possesses no rights to Investigate an
4 examine the books of the local con
4 pany. This statute now being in fore
i the city would hardly be so foolish
t to seriously entertain a proposition &c
l contract. except that as conditlo
e precedent to any contract being mad
= it would insist upon receiving and ha'
r ing such full and complete fnvestig;
o ton as to satisfy it's every rightful d.
j. mand and inquiry, and hardly woul
S the city make such contract, provide
the terms to be changed, should b
s changed from time to time, except tia
e coincident with such changes, the cit
l. should reserve the right to make il
investigations from time to time.
;. Answer to Questions Three an
|. Four: In answer to these question
f. same can be answered in one par
s graph. The City has right to assis
it's option to purchase of system I
j. the present company to another inc
# vidual or corporation. And such a
signee will possess all rights the Cit
r. now has to purchase under the tern