The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-01-04
LANE CH|DES FORD AND THE OTHERS ON FAULTY MEMORY Says Company Dug Pit Into
 Which It Has Suddenly
 Fallen LANE NOT INCLINED
 HELP TT GET OUT Presents Certificates From Ensley Citizens To Sustain His Con tention About Separation of the Two Contracts


 A majority of the commission President Culpepper Exum and Com missioner James weatherly-answered the communication of A. H. Ford pres ident of the Birmingham RAILWAY Light and Power company, yesterday. The mlssive to the Birmingham Kali way, Light and Power company head was passed by the commission With Judge Lane voting in the negative. Sub sequently Commissioner Lane penned a few lines to MT. Ford in which the minority member expressed his sur prise at the memory of MT Ford. He also disagrees with the majority as- soolates on the board and goes bit further by including In his letter a certificate from six citizens of Ens1ey to the effect that Judge Lane Is right as to whether the ear fare and lighting contract were at all times considered together. Judge Lanes position is that the car fare and the use of the city streets for freight trains were handled together and not the lighting contract and car fare.
 The letter adopted by the commis' sion and executed by President Exun follows:
 Letter From Majority
 MT A. II. Ford, President Birming-
 ham Railway, Light and Power com
 pany, Birmingham:
 Dear Sir-Your communication of December 2s has been received and contents noted.
 Your statement concerning the his tory and manner of the execution of the car fare and lighting contracts are substantially correct.
 As to your right to discontinue per formance of the fare contract in the event the referendum Is adverse to the lighting contract, that presents d legal question which the courts may take cognizance of and therefore We shall not attempt to pass upon 1t at this time.
 We condne ourselves solely to the question of facts involved. Yours very truly, cULPEPPER EXUM,
 President
 When Commissioner James Weather ly brought up the matter of a reply to MT. Ford, Judge Lane asked the commission to allow him the right to answer Mr. Ford as a minority mem Der when he secured time to do SO. The other members agreed to that. Whereupon MT. Weatherly introduced T motion to send the above reply which was voted for by MT EXum and MT. Weatherly. Judge Lane voted no.
 Judge Lanes Letter
 Later in the afternoon Judge Lane made public the following letter over his offi- cial signature, which was dispatched to MT. Ford:
 MT A. II. Ford President Birmingham
 Railway, Light and Power company,
 City;
 Dear Sir: Your communication of the 18th utimo., addressed to the Board of Commissioners, was duly received, and today majority of the board passed d motion that the president of the board be directed to address you the following communication. which explains itself:'
 Here Judge Lane reproduces the official lotter given above.
 Two of the members of said board voted for the motion, while I voted aganist It, and l deem it proper to state my reasons for so doing. In your letter of November 25, 1911, you say that in con nection with the 5 cent rate fare there was some agitation respecting the light ing rates charged by the company. cannot now recall any such agitation, and l am borne out in my recollection fin Tho letter of Commissioner Weatherly bearing date December 1, 1911, in which he says
 TO. The proposition to reduce the lighting rates to both the city and citi- zens came voluntarily from the company without suggestions from the commits sion, the Inducements to the company be- ing the increase in number of customers and immunity from rate changes for reasonable term of years
 "So 1t would seem that you are at fault in your recollection, in that the light mat ter came voluntarily from your company and was not induced by agitation. You further SIatc that the settlement of each matter would involve large loss of rev enue to the company, and that the com pany could not prudently agree to a set tlement of the rate contract unless 1t knew at the time what settlement could be secured regarding the lighting con- tract.
 If the lighting contract involves a large loss of revenue, I really cannot un- derstand why you cling to it with such tenacity. While you are correct in stas- ing that the board adopted resolution for a conference with you as to the re- duction O. lighting rates. still I think it was due me to state that | offered an amendment to confine the conference to the railroad rates. and to the running of lItlRnt gdIS On teTtdln streets or the ely, which was tabled. I never at any time consented to consider the lighting contract in connection with the rate contract, but always took the position that each should be considered separately, and that the city ought ret to be required to buy that which, in equity and justice. belonged to it already. If is true that in the confer. ences held before the meeting of the board on the 18th of November, 1911, 1t was stated by you, and perhaps MT Bradley, that you would not consider the reduction of the railroad rates except on condition that the light contract should be modified SO as to extend it ten years: but you are In error in stating that the two matters were thenceforth at all times considered together. They were certainly not considered during the meeting of the board. according to my recollection, whicn is horne out by the following eer- tificate If well known reputable citizens of Ensley:
 Certificate From Ensley
 The undersigned hereby certify that they attended the meeting of the com mission at which the lighting ordinance was adopted; that they were present from the time the meeting was called to or der until after the adoption of the ordi- nance, except a short interval while the