The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1913-11-24
Board Did Not Act on Rule.
Bond Explains Rule.

Bond Explains Rule.
S. J. Krick of the Logan company
informed the board today that his
company did not file the rules with its
bond, because the rules which had
been prepared by the city attorney and
been returnd to Mr.. Bond prior TO the
time the company submitted its bond.
Mr.. Bond frankly admitted drawing
up the rules, under one of which the
Light Heat and Power company is
now requiring deposits or guarantees,
! but stated that he intended the deposit
rude (Which reads: I'm case an appli-
cant for gas is not considered finan-
cially responsible, the company re-
serves the right TO require reason
able safe guaranty or a cash deposit
equalling TO the average gas bill for
a six weeks period, etc. to be inter
preted as referring only TO transients
who might possibly defraud the COM
pany, or people whose credit was
known to be bad.
He said he knew a public service
corporation was required TO serve all
people who demanded Its service and.
therefore, should be protected against
those people who might defraud it,
but he said he most emphatically dis
approved of any corporation obtain
ing such protection at the expense OF
all non-property holding patrons whose
credit was good.
krck Attacks Interpretation.
. In reply to this Mr.. krick stated
he did not know the city attorney had
ever placed such an Interpretation on
the deposit rule, and If such interpre
ton was made it would be held dis
criminatory He said that to tell one
non-property holding patron that he
would have to guarantee his gas bills
and to tell another that such action
was not required of him would be man
ifestly unfair.
So. Mr.. Krick stated, the Light, Heat
and Power company was doing what
gas companies in Ohio and various
other states were doing, placing al
people who could not guarantee theiI
gas bills with the real estate they
held on an equal footing, demanding
guarantees of their good faith through
cash deposits or guarantees of respon
sible parties.
We do not want TO handle cash de
posits. nor does your loCs-l company,
, stated Mr.. Krick. "All gas companies
would much prefer guarantees of their
bills, and cash deposits are accepted
only as a last recourse. On cash de
! posits We have TO pay six per cent in
terest, which with the complicated
bookkeeping system required. makes
= such system of protection undesira
t BILE"
Seeks an Agreement.
. Attorney Gus Condo of Marion, rep
! resenting the Logan company, urged
the board OF public works and the 10
! cal company TO get together and reacf
l some kind Of an agreement on th'
: question under dispute. so that i
would not be necessary to take an ap
+ peal to the state public utilities com
I mission.
, Attorney T. ]. Study, who was pres
2 ent only in the role OF an interested
citizen, toward the close of the discus
= sion took a hand in il, declaring tina
/ the deposit rule was a violation of th'
{ common law because it was discrimi
{ natory One man who owns no prop
a erty but who is financially responsible.
is Disseminated against in favor Of I
man whose only real estate holding
: might be a shack and whose credit i
= valueless." exclaimed Mr. Study
= Attorney WiIfred Jessup for tn
= Light, Heat and Power company, afte
: making the charge that the rules o
2 the Logan company had been prepare'
$ by the city attorney and sanctioned b.
the president of the board of works
{ stated that when his company tool
I over the Logan company's contract
4 was under the impression that thes
2 rules had been accepted by the boar
e Of works with the fling of the Logal
e company's bond. and had proceeded Z
place them in operation while still Ia
:. boring under this impression.
+ tssaiIs Attack
n He said the first that the l. H. & F
L knew that the rules had never bee
approved by the beard was when OF
z of the local newspapers raised a grea
, cry Of protest over the deposit feature
e charging that a great injustice ha
been done the people OF Richmond an