Saturday news. (Watertown, S.D.) 19??-19??, 1913-03-27
MUNICIPAL
BlJSIN SIS
City Commissioners Make Report
on Dakota Central Telephone
Company's Matter.
OHTNESS PORCH STILL ON TAP
o. M. Lane Appointed as City
Auditor to Succeed Thomas
Davis, Resigned.

At the regular meeting Of the city
commissioners last Monday evening
all members we're present About the
most important business transacted
was the discussion of the telephone
proposition. After carefully going
over the matter the commissioners
have submitted an answer to the Da-
kota Central Telephone Company
which will explain itself in this issue
The Ohtness porch matter is still !
in the hands of Judge Sherwood OF
able to give his decision on the in
junction matter until after the jury |
cases have been tried in this term of |
the circuit court.
Commissioner Snyder had John o. .
Johnson, the local manager OF the
Dakota Central Telephone Company
on the carpet for long time and
fired questions at him from every pos
sible angle. Mr.. Johnson stood up un-
der the fire" very we'll but there
were a good many questions which
he could not answer to the satisfaction
OF the commissioners.
Appoint City Auditor.
Upon the motion OF Commissioner
Whooley. O. NJ. Lane, who has been
deputy city auditor was appointed as
city auditor to succeed Thos. H. Davis,
resigned. The appointment was made
to fill the uneXpired term of Mr.
Davis and his salary was fixed at SIS
per month.
Answer to Telephone Co.
Dakota Central Telephone Co.,
Watertown, South Dakota,
Gentlemen:
We have before us your estimate
and probable cost of construction, in.
stallation, operation and maintenance
of the new proposed automatic tele-
phone system about to be installed in
this city, together with your estimate
Of possible revenue derived there
from. We note that the said system,
when in operation, will cost in the
neighborhood of $125, 100000, which in
cludes real estate and building. You
submit the following rates and state
that they must be receiSed by you
/ in order for your company to receive
a revenue of 8 per cent on your in
vestment: Business phones $3.50 per
month, single line residence phones
! $500 per month, party line residence
| phones $1.50 per month and exten-
sicns $1.00 per month, which we figure
would net you approximately IA per
cent.
!. The matter of telephone franchise,
rates, etc, have been in litigation in
i both the federal courts and state
l courts for a number of years, and as
yet no specific adjudication of the
/ same has been established, and while
our constitutional rights are that we
i may or may not grant applications to
i public service corporations or other
II parties 10 cOHSlIuCt, operate anu main
4 tain telephone lines within our city,
and by granting the use of the streets,
4 alleys, etc, for such we feel it our
duty when entering into such con
4 tract, that we must protect the pat
& rons from an excessive rate for SER
\ vice, and we feel justified in saying
4 that the rates submitted by you are
4 much higher than is necessary to give
4 you the desired returns.
After a comparative examination in
to the merits of the automatic system
las against the system now in vogue,
we see no reason why this city should
A object to the change, but your claim
made in favor of the new system over
q the present one are somewhat, in our
i Judgment, unfounded, as there would
not be much difference in the cost OF
4 operation between the two Those
who claim to know say that the auto.
matte is far more profitable to the
company to purchase and operate
. than the present one, and we think
that the rates should remain about
1.-the same.
4 From Information received from
] various sources we gare advised that
I2ao accurate estimate is obtainabie as