The Birmingham age-herald., 1914-07-10
Says Company Has No Right to Charge Rates of Twenty-Five
 Years Ago
WILL KEEP UP HIS
 FIGHT TO FORFEIT
 WATER FRANCHISE
Claims Company Has Shown Wrong Spirit in Refusing to Pay Franchise Tax Under
 Revenue Law

My position in the water rate issue is not only fair, reasonable, honest and decent, in spite of insnuations of the waterworks attorneys to the contrary but its right declares City Commissioner James Weatherly in formal statement issued last night in reply to the state ment made by counsel for the water works company in yesterday morning s ' Age-Herald.
 T have not assumed this position on the issue with the waterworks company merely to gain little advantage in pub lie opinion," adds MT. Weatherly. 'I have taken this position because 1t is based on fundamentals which underle the many superficial issues being brought forth to cloud the real controversy in the minds of the public. contend the waterworks tcompany has no right or presumption of a right to place in effect increased water rates following Judge Crows de- l, cision I insist that the water consumers l of this city have the right and the honest right to oppose that increase and if they choose to do it by refusing to pay the increased water bills they are within their sovereign rights as American citizens'
 The Formal Statement
 Mir. Weatherly's formal statement is as follows:
 Tn their latest statement in The Age Herald the counsel for the waterworks company recede from their position in their first pronunciamento and seek an other excuse for the water company S proposed increase of water rates. They now contend the increase is consequent I tial rather than mandatory as a result of the courts decree.
 They state that while Judge Crow did not order the higher rates restored, his decision necessitated the company falling back on the contract of 1888, the rates of which are higher. But the water works attorneys choose to treat two ques- tions as settled, when they are far from such. They assume that the contract of 1888 is legal and just, but the city now has a suit which will be appealed to the su- preme court of the United States. in which it is contended that the contract of 1888 Is not just and legal. This 1888 contract for 30 years fixes the water rates of Birmingham, according to the water works company's own contention But the fixing of rates is Legislative power. No body. municipal or state. under the constitution of the United States and of the states has the authority to surrender or divest itself of it's legislative power for 90 years or for any other number of years. And as long as that question has not been finally decided, the waterworks attorneys err in informing the public that the water company bases its right to charge higher rates the legality of the contract of 1888.
 Calls It Another Subterfuge
 "Then again they state that it is true fhe company could charge lower rates than the maximum in the 1888 contract, but that it is forced to charge the maximum on account of the fiat rates being in force instead of the meter and , the corresponding waste of water by con- sumers under the flat rate system. That is merely another subterfuge. Any man knows that the rates made in 1888 to put a new corporation on its feet could very easily be unreasonable and too high g years later Water rates all over the country have been reduced since the 1888 contract was made Other cities have