The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-01-29
City Opens Fight Against
WaterwOrks Company
Before Judge Crow
CASE WILL BE HEARD
ON MARCH THE FIRST
City Seeks to Show That Water Com
pany Has Wilfully and Fragrantly
Violated Franchise Con-
tracts of 1883


Against the BirmiIsham waterworl<s
company the city of Birmingham
started its fight yesterday Before e
c. Crow. Judge of the circuit court, quo
warranto proceedings We're filed in the
name of the state Of Alabama ex rel
James Weatherly and James Weatherly,
plaintiff versus the Birmingham Wa
terworks company. a corporation. de-
fendant The case was set down for
hearing March 1.
The city seeks to show that the wa
terworks company has willfully. severe
~ and fagrantly violated the franchise
contract of 1888. which Judge Grubb
held was valid and the city prays the
court to so hold The city 1t will be
recalled has cancelled the franchises
of the company here and the contracts
under which the company operates. If
the court holds that the contracts have
been violated as the city charges then
even though the 1883 contract is valid
it will be annulled by the act of
abridgement on the part of the company.
At that time the city will have a per-
feet right to treat with the company as
to rates.
The proceedings In the circuit court
are so foreign to the decision of Judge
Grubb of the federal court as to per-
nit of no tresspassing by the city ON
that decree.
Judge Grubb held that the Exum- Lane
referendum was invalid and that the
Weatherly ordinance could not be en-
forced because of the existing contract
of 1888. which was in force until vio-
lated The city will undertake to prove
the charges that the water company has
violated the contract of 1888 and upon
that the fight will be waged All fran
chises and contracts held by the COM
pany the city seeks to annul.
The proceedings yesterday were filed
by Capt Romaine Boyd, city attorney,
NJ. NJ ullman, assistant city attorney
and George Huddleston, on behalf of
the city.
The Bill Filed
The bill follows:
ITO the fonorables E. G. Crow and c.
b. Smith, Judges of the Circuit court
of jefferson County, Alabama.
The state of Alabama exhibits this
petition on the information and rela-
tion of James Weatherly. who joins as
plaintiff With said state, and who for
and in the name of said state of Ala
bama and for himself, informs and
shows the court as follows;
I. That relator is a resident citizen
of the city of Birmingham in said coun-
ty Of Jefferson and state of Alabama
- That defendant, the Birmingham
Waterworks company, having its main
office and business in said city of Bir
mingham, is an incorporated body, char
tered by a special act of the general as
sembly of Alabama, to provide and fur
nish a water supply for the citizens of
said city and the suburbs thereof said
act having been approved February Is,
1885, and being entitled An act to in
corporate The Birmingham Water
works company for the city of Bir
mingham, and to confer upon ii cer
tain corporate powers said act is con-
tanned in the Acts of Alabama, 1884,
1885, on pages 415 TO 41S inclusive, and
copy of same is hereto attached and
marked Exhibit A and made part
hereof.
Had Thirty Year Franchise
"3 That, pursuant TO the grant of
its said charter, defendant obtained the
necessary consent of said city and the
absorbed suburbs hereinafter named to
the laying OF its water mains and pipes
in or under the streets and highways
thereof, thus acquiring the right 10
exercise the main purpose for which it
was Incorporated and is engaged, to-wit,
the business of supplying water to said
city and the inhabitants thereof. Said
consent OF said city and suburbs was
secured by entering into certain 80
year franchise contracts to supply wa
ter to the citizens and city of Bir
mingham and the said former cities and
towns absorbed by said city Of Bir-
mingham to-wit: Avondale, WoodIawn.
Ensley, West End. East Lake, Wylam,
Elyton, Graymont. North Haven and
Pratt city; a copy of said franchise
contract with said city of Birmingham
being, hereto attached marked Exhibit
B. and made part hereof. A copy Of
said franchise contract with said alb
sorbed city or town of West End is
hereto annexed and marked Exhibit
G." and made a part hereof-all of said
franchise contracts of said absorbed
cities or towns with defendant are sub
stantially the same as the said con-
tract With West End, except that said