The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1914-05-23
MAYOR HAS TILT
WITH TELEPHONE co.
coMPANrS ATTORNEY TRIES TO
RUN A SANDY" ON THE MAYOR
MAYOR WILL FORCE THE FIGHTING
Proposes to Have Franchise Secured II fie
Has to Rsy6t TO Force to Accom-
= plish That Purpose

Mayor Gaifney and the Michigan
Telephone Co. has hooked up for tair.
The Mayor says that il Is a fight to a
finish, providing the council will
stand back Of him.
The Telephone companys troubles
tarted in this city through the very
rotten service that has been given at
times and the public be Id
policy pursued by the officers
of the concern, especially the men
who have held positions Of superin-
tendent for the upper peninsula. The
Iiocal men would like to do better but
y they claim that they are hampered by
those above them and there is no use
blaming them for conditions that they
are powerless 20 remedy
In reply to the Mayors message the
company S attorney wrote Mr.. Gaffney
as follows.
Detroit, May 9th, 1914.
Honorable James J. Gaffney.
Crystal Falls, Michigan.
Dear Sir:
Mr.. q NJ Welcb,
Commercial superintendent of the
Michigan State Telephone Company,
has requested me to write You in
regard TO the operation Of the Michi-
gan State Telephone Company In Crys-
tai Falls beg leave to submit the
following
The Michigan State Telephone
Company is corporation organized
under Act. No 1919 Of the Public Acts
OF Michigan for 1888; this Act is
commonly known as THE Telephone
and Messenger Service Act and is
found in Chapter III Of the Compiled
Laws OF 1897
~ This law gives every corporation or
: fganized under it power to construct
and maintain lines OF wire or other
material or use in the transmission Of
telephone messages along, over, across,
or under any public place, streets and
highways, and across or under any of the
waters In this State, with all neoes-
sary erections and fixtures thereto.
Paragraph 660l
Compiled Laws OF 1897
This law was construed 10y the Su-
preme Court OF Michigan in the fol-
lowing cases
Michiagn Telephone Company vs
City Of st. Joseph l9l Mich. 50e
Michigan Telephone Company vs. City
OF Benton Harbor, l2l Mich. 5l2
The Michigan State Telephone Com
pany since it's incorporation has been
working under this state law in all the
cities of Michigan and it's right to do
so has never been disputed
The law gave TO each company in.
corporated under it, vested rights in
it's property when placed in the streets
and highways and IL was not necessary
to acquire local franchises in the var
ions municipalities in the State,
This law is in no way i'm conflict
with the new constitution of this State
and is, in no way at variance with
It,.
The new constitution does not
attempt, in anyway to disturb vested
rights or contractual relations made
between the State ard the telephone
companies operating under the laws Of
1888, for the reason that If it did so
it is obvious IN )t it would be in con-
travention % tho Constitution Of the
United stXes
This probably covers the information
asked by you but if there is anything
else i'm connection with the matter
about which You desire to be informed
wc3shall gladly take il up with You.
VI Yours respectfully.
~. T.. Thompson
Attorney
Mr.. GafIney replied as follows
Mr.. w Il. Thompson, Attorney,
Michigan State Telephone Co.
Detroit, Michigan
Dear SIR
Your lcttcr Of May 9th, in
nkhrd TO the operation Of the Michi-
gan State Telephone Company has been
received, and your contention that The
Telephone Messenger Service Act"
gives your cospvration power TO con.
strnct and maintain lines Of wires or
other materials used in transmission
Of telephone Npes,age, along, over,
across or under tny public place, street
and highways and across or under any |
waters In this state. with all necessary