Tonopah daily bonanza. [volume] (Tonopah, Nev.) 1906-1929, 1915-09-24
Continued from Page 81

vacant for any considerable time. the
disconnection was made for sanitary
reasons. No counter evidence was Of
fered upon this point, and il seems
quite obvious that the reason given is
4 good one When a house stands va
cant with the sewer pipes not in use,
II follows necessarily that there is no
regular flushing, as a result of which
gases will form in the pipes and find
their way back into the premises, ere
atlng unsanitary conditions The
premises having been disconnected
from the sewer service for suffi-
Client reason, # seems no more than
lust that II reconnection is desired
someone else than the company
should bear the expense. This is es-
pecally true in a mining camp where
the population Is to great extent
transltory People are coming and GO
ing an the time and houses frequent
~ stand vacant Jor longer or shorter
periods. For example, a tenant might
not occupy a house more than sin
gle month and then move away This
might often occur. and as a matter
OF fact often does occur In towns
where the conditions are similar to
those existent in Tonopah Clearly,
in such cases. If the disconnection is
made for sanitary reasons it would
be unjust 10 expect the company to
bear the expense OF recommending
every time a new tenant moves into
house II seems the logical view to
take that a sewer service Is one Of
those modern improvements properly
belonging to every fairly we'll appoint.
ed residence. and that Il Is incumbent
upon The owner Of the property 20 look
after the connections.
III That the reconnection charges
are excessive The Commission has
no way Of determining what would be
just and reasonable charge to be
made for such service because the
conditions existing upon different
premises are so widely variant. In
one case il might only be necessary Ia
dig two or three feet, and in other
cases it might be necessary to dis
twelve or fifteen feet. or more. Upon
this point the evidence was altogether
indefinite.
~. The refusal OF the company tC
allow two tenants TO be served
through one lateral
This rule on the part Of the com
pany seems 10 be a reasonabel one
unless the owner of the property vii
guarantee the payment. To requir,
the service Of two tenants through
one lateral depriyes the company o
reasonable protection against non
payment in the event of one OF tn,
patrons being delinquent. Seryic,
cannot be shut off from him withou
at the same time denying Il TO tn
tenant who pays A public service
corporation has a right reasonably &
protect Itself against delinquents
hls question can readily be settlei
eIhef BY the owner Of The premise
suaranteeing the payment OF the ren
"a or hy making the custom uniform
OF serving only one patron through
single lateral
v The demanding of a deposit:
The Commission has found this
rather difficult matter to deal win
ana has only made an order In a ST
sle case, and that with reference {
leiephohe service. In that case tn
commission held that the practice {
demanding a five dollar deposit fo
tne installation of telephone servie
was unreasonable and should be di
oohtlnued, but at the same time tn
telephone company was permitted I
require two months payment in a,
vance. If the same rule were to b
applied in this case II is not apparet
'nat II would result In very much be-
eht to the patrons, and with sue
Hghl as the Commission has upon Il
subject, II should not al this tin
make an order absolute. condemnir
the company's requirement of d
posit
VI The question of the REASONABLE
ness Of the rates.
Upon this point It is proper to 81
mat measured by any recognize
standard of rate making the eyiden'
lails to show that the rates charg,
by the company are excessive or u
reasonable On behalf of the COZ
plalnants, MIR. Moore laid stress I
t'e tact mat sewer charges were hle
er than water charges, or electr
nght charges, and claimed that
comparison the sewer charges We
excessive. Such comparisons pro
nothing Comparisons are not r
garded by courts and commissions
strong evidence At the best. Comps
lsons are never considered except
tween utilities of the same kind a
character, and then only when {
circumstances and conditions are 81
llar II might be that the sew
charge was very much higher tn
me water charge, or vice versa, a
II would prove literally nothing W
regard to the reasonableness Of eth
u this Commission were 10 make
order holding these rates tu be exc
AVe upon the basis OF such teslimt
as that, and the order were confess
IN court, and nothing better or stro
" we're introduced as evidence. II
as certain as anything In legal !