The Twin Falls times. [volume] (Twin Falls, Idaho) 1905-1916, 1914-01-02
WENDELL ANSWERS POWER co.
village OF Wendell Not Satisfied With
Answer of Power Co.

Asserting that the argument and
prlef presented by the defendant, the
Great Shoshone & Twin Falls Water
Power company, before the public
utilities commission in the case where
in the village of Wendell is plaintiff,
alleging discrimination in rates charg-
ed consumers in that village by this
company as compared to the rates the
same company charges consumers in
other towns and villages, is like the
modern diaphanous clinging skirt in
that it touches everything and covers
nothing counsel for the village today
filed it's answer and brief with the
commission.
| Taking up the brief of the Great
Shoshone company and treating it's
defense with satire, Rex Wilson and
Jess HaWley, local attorneys for Wen
dell, reply to counsel for the power
company, S. H. Hays, as follows:
Every logical argument from a
curbstone discussion to dignified
presentation of legal principles before
the supreme court of the United States
is conducted on the plan of assertion
and denial. The end obtained in all
tribunals is a fine decision upon some
material point In some case the is
sues were logically made upon the
complaint of the village of Wendell
and the answer of the defendant cor
poration. A date was set for presen-
tation of facts by both parties. They
were before the commission and the
case was closed so far as evidence
concerned. The trial Of this case mar
rows the issue down to one general
question, is the defendant guilty of
discrimination
Sarcastically referring to the brief
of the Great Shoshone company the
Wendell brief goes on to- say: "We
really enjoyed reading the defendants
bit of fanciful statement absent mind
edly labeled as brief Like all good
fiction it was interesting. We do not
care to betray ourselves into denial
OF 1t because that would appear too
much like attempting defense which
at this time we most pleasantly assert
is not seriously in our mind We deny
what is irrelevantly injected into this
simple case by defendant be forgetting
the lesson we have drawn from read
ing Don Quixote's famous battle with
the windmills.
We noted while reading the un-
sworn testimony of counsel for de-
fendant, aliunde the official record,
that the defendant scared and dipped
easily and lightly in the ether of fancy
and romance. While we have no
doubt that the commission will recog-
n1ze defendants unusual, bizarre and |
unconventional wandering from the
only point at issue, still we pause to
say that when these theral creatures
or cOunsel's mental conception are
brought to mundane plane and load
ed with terrestrial facts, they will not |
be SO inclined to frolic and play"
And again the brief of the village of |
Wendell pays its compliments to the
counsel for the big power corporation
with the following bit of SATIRE
This commission has no doubt
heard of the cutie fish and its method
OF defense. We have no doubt in our
mind of defendants knowledge of the
famous fish, for the various pleadings
formed by it are modelled upon the
style of fighting and defense of the
cutie fish. The defendant here seeks
to muddy the waters and hopes in the
created by the obscurity of
its irrelevancy to escape the adverse
and judgment so clearly de-
served by 1t in this particular matter"
The climax of the sarcastic reply to
the Great Shoshone's complaint about
rival power companies by counsel for
The village is reached in concluding
with the following shaft:
We suggest in answer to the de-
fendant's brief, which like the fam
1us diaphanous clinging skirt of mo-
Tern days, touches everything and
overs nothing, that if these terrible
-h1ngs are being done to the defend
ant company and it needs protection
rom the commission from its more
powerful and capable competitor, that
t should make those complaints the
subject for separate action Capital
News.