The Waxahachie daily light. [volume] (Waxahachie, Tex.) 1894-current, 1916-04-12


other companies mentioned. '"e"
suggested that We go over ana %"
-. r,dee Croce in regard to TINS
a,,.r which we did. ] stated 10
Mr. Groce in substance IS apo,e'
Mr. croee then again caiieu IN
r.-,a,s attention to this matter ana
aataa - Il was not true that the
Texas Telephone compaN was ="
old BRACES Valley company "ni'n
had merely changed its name anu
arr Earle replied that II was no'
tho case: that the Brazos Naiies
company had actually SURRENDERED
~ charter ard dissolved, having
turned its assets over TO the leA"'
Telephone company. Judge Groee
then suggested that If that was true
the Texas Telephone company mao
no franchise rights in Waxahachie
and that the ordinance was not
properly drawn.
Mr.. Earle then suggested 'h"e
the merger be allowed in favor OF
the Ellis County Independent leie
rbena rompany, which, he again
stated. was a live corporation ana
owns the plant in Waxahachie, ana
was operated by his company, ex-
cent the switch board, and that hau
been put in by the Brazos Vaiiey
Telephone company. 1t was theh
stated that there had never peeh
any proposition made to turn the
| matter over to the Ellis County IN
dependent Telephone company, ana
the, n was not believed that the
city council would be willing TO 40
anything of that kind. MIR. Earle
then stated that the Ellis County
Telephone company was operating
under the franchise granted to nm
self and Mr.. Boynton, and assigns
for n term of fifty years, and this
led to the further objection that the
council would probably not be Will
ing to grant merger under tnat
franchise because Of the term TOT
which it was granted and because
the company, according to MT.
Earle's admission, was practically
insolvent.
4 II was then suggested that the
whole matter ought to wait until
the franchise rights Of these several
companies in the town were under
stood, and that he, having the rec
ords of all their proceedings, ought
to show the actual conditions. Mr..
Earle then stated that he would be
Wiling for the matter to go over a
reasonable length of time in order
that these matters might be inquired
into, and Mr.. Groce and myself de
clned to finish the incomplete or
dinance until we were advised as to
the facts.
On Tuesday night before the city
council these matters were explain
ed by Mr.. Grcce who then retired
and MIR. Earle instead of agreeing
before the council to postpone the
matter as he had stated to Mr.
Groce and myself that he did not
object to, strenuously insisted on the
passage of the ordinance III the
shape that it was when it left Mr.
Groce's hands with some additions
by him and Mr. Williams.
Now as to my proposition before
based upon what had TRANSFERRED
between Mr. Earle, Mr. Groce and
myself, and wish 10 protect the
public interest against hasty action
in matter of so much Importance
when we did not know just what
we were granting, and to what com
pany. That the franchise offered
: was an amendatory franchise to the
Brazos Valley company's franchise
and that if the Texas Telephone
company was to take over the bust
ness that the council ought to grant
it an independent franchise.
Mr.. Earle insisted before the coun-
ell that it was necessary to postpone
action on the matter because ne said
the records would show what com
pany owns the franchises ana plants
here, and stated the records would
show that the Texas Telephone Co
to be such owner.
l have since taken the pains aHd
trouble to examine the records herS
to see what the records did actually
show, and | find that the Texa:
Telephone Co. has on record, in the
Ellis county deed of trust records
q mortgage for five million dollar.
covering all of It's local exchanges il
Texas among which the local ex