The Waxahachie daily light. [volume] (Waxahachie, Tex.) 1894-current, 1916-03-24

ing made would De uuehiorcedbie al
either law, or equity, even fhough
they we're put in writing, unless they
we're incorporated in the franchise
itself and another clause added to
the effect that all rights of the COM
pany under the franchise should be
forfeited unless such promises were
complied with Do you believe the
telephone companies would be will
ing to that arrangement? Under
stand, / would be against the merger
plan even upon this basis II 1t still
carried with it this financial tribute
of so cents per month for the fuii
life of the franchise. | am simply
endeavoring to show where your ar
gument would lead to.
When you say in the next para
graph of your editorial that IF we,
(meaning yourselD, have interpret
ed Mr.. McRae's first communication
correctly it contained an implied
threat to force the Independent cont
pany out of the field" you leave me
at total loss TO know from what
expression of mine you made SUCH
Interpretation. Fran the beginning
/ have sought to make it plain, and
believe | have made it plain, that
it was a matter of absolute indiffer-
ence to me and that | believed it to
be a matter of indifference 70 the
people of WaxahacIie as to wether
these two telephone corporations
combine, or continued to operate
separately, but that if they do merge
it be upon a basis which is fair 10
the people; and if they rather remain
separate companies, then let their
continued existence rest upon the
rule of the survival of the fittest,
the rule which governs all other
corporations, and should govern
these. Please get it clearly in your
mind that | have no desire, nor do
| believe the people of our city nave
any desire, to interfere with the
method and manner these two corpo-
iGtions want to conduct their busi-
ness affairs. nor whether they oper-
ate them jointly or separately.
What we object to is that we should
be forced To pay long continued
tribute to them simply because they
ind
properties, or because comparative
lily few people in our city, by their
own choice, are subscribers to both
phones and want TO SHIFT the bur-
den to other shoulders. And tais
reminds me TO say that | have never
stated that these double subscribers
heve not agreed to the increased
rate. as You seem to want the peo-
pie to understand. l have no doubt
that they have agreed TO it. Most
any one who was bearing a burden
which some other person would be
forced to assist him; but OF course
such an arrangement would not DO
right
What | did say. and what an.
standing by, is that while the double
subscribers might have been the in
stigators of this merger plan, ana
very likely were. they did not offer
t. pay the increased rate. 1t is
perfectly natural for them to want
the merger, for il would relieve
them OF a burden; but il is wholly
contrary 10 human nature 70 impute
tc them voluntary offer To pay
more for service than other people
were paying. The logical and hui
man thing 70 believe about this phase
sf che. case is that the point was
Isl sea IN tae people who would get
The sleiaes aRiiy ypn kaaE who. that
would'be.e
In conclusion permit me to say
that in lending your,very. poten. in
flHence 10 the contamination Of this
merger plan YOU should view it from
the standpoint of all the Users OF