Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-12-19

TO UPHOLD SYME
Counsel Says Commission
Cannot Approve Merger
of Gas Companies.
ACTION BY CONGRESS
HELD TO BE NECESSARY
Senate Resolution Calling for Facts
on Phone System Considered
by Body.

Although in session for nearly four
hours today, the public utilities commits
sion took no action on the opinion sub
mitted yesterday by Corporation Counsel
Syme, holding that the commission is
without authority to permit the Wash
ington and Georgetown Gas Light COM
panies to amalgamate, but approval is
expected.
The merger proposal was suggested to
the utilities board as a basis for settle
ment of the suit filed against the COM
panles charging violation of the Lafol
lette anti-merger Jaw, which is now
pending in the District Supreme Court
Opinion to Be Endorsed.
While the corporation counsePs opin-
ION was not acted upon today, it is
practically certain that the commits
sion will indorse 1T and notify the COM
panies that, in order to amalgamate,
they will have to obtain the express.
approval OF Congress.
The meeting today of tho utilities
board was the first held in several
weeks. Consideration was given to the
resolution passed by the Senate call
ing upon the commission for certain in :
formation as to the business methods
OF the Chesapeake and Potomac Tele-
phone Company. A report on this mat
Ter probably will be sent to Congress
early next week
Inquiry Regarding Grant of Power.
Corporation Counsel syme's opinion
deais ilrst with the question as to whether
the acts of Congress Incorporating the
two gas light concerns contain any express
grant OF power to either of these COM
panies to sell the whole or any part of
their property. He says. with particular
reference to the Georgetown COMPANY
that II 1t has not this right 1t could not
execute valid conye, ance of it's property
to the Washington aGs Light Comnanv
and the latter concern could not take a
title which the vendor legally was unable
to give.
The opinion then goes into the legisIa-
tive history of both companies, refers to
the acIs Incorporating them and shows
that not only do these acts fail to con-
tam any grant of power to sell or
ailenate any property essential to the
performances of their obligations to the
public, but that as to the companies
themselves the legislation is so framed
lhat neither is permitted to encroach
upon the rights of the other, either by
the acquisition of its property or the
invasion Of its territory.
Other Points Discussed.
Other points touched on in the opinion
deal with the question of whether or not
under any of the general principles of
law applicable to the situation the
Georgetown company would have the
right to sell any essential part of its
property in the absence of express
authority granted by Congress and the
right of the public utilities commission,
by any reasonable construction, to give
a power to the companies to sell their
property which has not been given by
Congress or by the general law.
With respect to the nrst question the
corporation counsel concludes that "a
express legislative authority sell, convey
or eliminate any property necessary to
the performance OF its obligation to the
state and to the people,
Concerning the latter phase of the sit
uation, he says that TO construe the
public utilities law as giving to those
companies the power to ALLEVIATE property
essential TO their operation would re-
quirc the language of the act to be so
explicit to that effect as to be too plain
for argument. Such language, he points
out the act does not contain.
Equitable and Righteous.
Concluding. the corporation counsel
says. in part:
The philosophy of the law as applied
TO modern conditions and necessities has
formulated the fundamental principles
hereinbefore referred to, as announced by
the highest judicial tribunals of England
and the United States.
These principles are basic. equitable
and righteous, and established by recog
nized authority to enforce justice and
direct duty. They vitalize the rights
which the people and the state have to
compel accommodation and service as
consideration for the grant of special
power, privilege and opportunity. They
establish the doctrine that the duty of a
public utility corporation is primarily to
the state and its citizens, for whose bene-
tit il enjoys privileges, franchises and
facilities not possessed by the ordinary
citizen.
with the grant of these privileges and
opportunities come reciprocal duties, and
the law will not place a premium upon
faithlessness by permitting public serv-
Ice corporation without the authority OF
the sovereign power which has granted
its franchises to curtail it's capacity,
abridge its facilities for service or de-
stroy its power for usefulness by the
alienation of property essential to the
execution of those purposes for which it
was created, and over the exercise of
which the law extends its protection as
well as its compulsion."