The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1913-08-09
Subscription Rates
BENNINGToN. VT, AUG. .. 1918
The REAL ISSUE

| Inc Issue IN THIS Socdlleu lele
phone controversy that is stirring
Vermont isi not whether the tele-
| phone companies should be investi-
| gated or not Everybody agrees that
| 1t is proper they should be, inasmueh
as complaints, especially In some
| ections OF the state, are quite gen
eral respecting the rates and ser
vice they give. The issue Is ute
a different one and may be stated
| thuy:
l. Should Investigations OF public
service corporations be conducted by
| the body established by law for this
purpose. or by special counsel APP
pointed by the governor?
2. In the event that such latter in
quiTy is made, even by consent OF
the regularly constituted body, are
! its findings to be accepted as find
| ipgs of facts by the regular commits
sion and Is the latter to be estopped
from making such investigation as
| its own understanding of the require
ments laid down by the law and its
own judgment of known conditions
| demand?
1 "a w hCtHtl Alit HOl u illt
regularly constituted investigating
body refuses to proceed in a manner
that he prescribes. is justified in
summarily ousting the members Of
such body?
The issue, then, is over admins
trative procedure, and as 1t may
serve as precedent il is an impor
tant one. not only now but for the
future. Randolph Herald and News
In the opinion of The Banner, the
Randolph paper hasn't come within
hundred rows OF apple trees of
stating the exact issue, and its state
ment OF the case misses the chief
points
We think all will admit that under
the circumstances and after all that
had been adduced, an investigation
OF the telephone monopoly was iusti-
fed. The Herald and News and 9th
ers who take it's view of the case,
say that this investigation should be
made by the public service commits
sion and We will not dispute it.
The question then comes to point
of how to proceed to get the actual
facts. -tt T
The telephone company IL not u
Vermont corporation. Its books can
be brought here only II 1t so chooses.
Tho letters passed In this case and
en- file stated that certain questions
would be answered from Boston and
pretty plainly Unlimited that other
qucctions would not be answered AT
all The public service commission
and every other man in Vermont
who has ever given thought to ques-
tions OF this kind knows how difficult
IL is TO get books and other facts
from an out OF the state corporation
unless II is for their interest TO bring
! them.
instantly the fact becomes obvious
| that the only correct way to proceed
was to put the burden OF proof on the
telephone company by issuing such
an order as Governor Fletcher sug-
| gested.
This is no way jeopardized the In
terest of the telephone company II
the order was unjust the company
had the evidence to bring here and
prove It's case. whereas II the order
were just the people of the state OF
Vermont could in no way compel the
company TO bring the evidence here
to show that the order was just
The method advised by the COVER.
nor is precisely ono OF the methods
used by tho Interstate commerce
commission In getting at facts when
4 corporation proves obdura,e
The Vermont public service com
misricn, however refused to take
this perfectly fair and obvious
method of getting at the facts. |,
insisted on following the old red tape
methods. Notwithstanding the fact
that the plan ID proposed was unfair
to the people Of Vermont and unduIy
favorable to corporate monopoly
II was following precedent regardless
of the fact that II was the wrong
road to Justice.
We have no idea that the public
service commission was vicious or
corrupt in the matter. 1t simply
didn't have the backbone. stamina
and agressiyeness to- break away
from old grandmother precedent and
take straight line to justice.
AS we understand It the issue IS
whether the governor was justified
in firing the Commission because il
Insisted on pursuing course tina,
was in danger Of proving Inadequate
and unjust and unfair to the people OF