The Birmingham age-herald., 1914-04-21
Alabama Power Co. Had Planned to Sell to the
 B. R., l.. & P. Go.
STATE LAW IS FOUND
 STRICT ON SUBJECT
Condition of Grant to Power Com pany Was That Nothing Re- sembling Monopoly Would
 Be Permitted

In reference to the signing of con- tract between the Alabama Power .om- pany and the Birmingham Railway, Light and Power company for electric power from Lock 12, there is said to be serious difference of opinion among the attorneys
 for the Birmingham Railway, Light and
 Power company and the United Gas, which may result in the failure of the
 companies to get together after all. It was stated yesterday that the New York attorneys for the United Gas and Electric
 company and the local attorneys could
 not agree upon the expediency of the local
 company's signing up with the Alabama
 Power company on the ground of prob
 ably violating the trust and anti-monopoiy clauses in the Alabama laws and grants to the Alabama Power company.
 It is stated that the grant to the Ala- bama Power company giving that con
 ern without price or payment or reward
 the total rights to dam the Coosa river
 at Ocampo was surrounded with eondl-
 tions to the effect that the Alabama
 Power company should sell to that con
 cern applying first and that no agreement
 should be made which would be in effect
 the buying out of one company by the
 other or in effect even remotely a mo-
 nopoly or in effect destroying competition.
 The Birmingham Railway, Light cnd
 Power company is perhaps the first son-
 cern in this city which applied for power
 and could rightfully lay claim to con
 sideraton on that ground. However the
 Birmingham Railway, Light and Power
 company is in the business of supplying
 electric energy to local consumers and if that concern buys from the Alabama Power company and sells to the ultimate consumers as is planned it is believed that such an act would be at least tee violation of the spirit of the legislation
 in connection with the Alabama Power company grant.
 Local Attorneys Would Not Agree It is stated that the New York attor- neys for the AlabamP Power company and the United Gas and Electric com l pany have decided that to sign up with | the Birmingham Railway, Light aud Power company would be all right. ,3ut just there it is stated that the local at
 torneys for the Birmingham Railway, 1 Light and Power company said that so far as they were concerned they would | iiOt pt t party tD any SuGn | It is stated that the law surrounding the grant to the Alabama Power company | goes further and provides that any agent | or attorney that assists in promulga ting | a contract that is in violation of the con l ditions which attempt to proven a monop- | oly will be subject to punishment under l criminal laws. For that reason 1t is | said, there is being used the greatest car- ton by the attorneys and local officials | In handling the proposition.
 The developments in reference to the | contract have been expected for i. ne
 months, as it was impossible for local | men interested to ascertain why 1t vas 1 that definite statement has been with
 held in connection with the proposed )n- | tract. More than year ago James Mitch-
 ell said the contract was signed, only to
 retract that statement in less than 24 1 hours. What influence caused him to
 make such a retraction has always been
 more or less a mystery here. Again the 1 statement was made months and mont hs 1 ago by M. Webb Offutt, then in temporary | charge of local Alabama Power company | operations, that the contract was signed | He was immediately called to task by l telegrams from New York and the most | severe verbal dressing down ever admin ] istered to local official of that company
 was given the genial vice president. | Not Matter of Details
 | George Bullock. now at the head of the l Birmingham Railway, Light and Power company properties, has said time and 1 again that the contract was only a ma | ter of details, but despite the talents f many technically trained engineers who
 are accustomed to solve details without delay, he has yet been unable to say
 that the contract was signed. Yesterday
 the interesting report was spread over the l city that after all. 1t was no mucn
 a matter of detais, but was a question of whether the state laws of Alabama l would allow it. It is said that this propo- 1 sition is just now causing the two com | panies considerable embarrassment, and l that something must be done during the l fo du ha aif In