The Bourbon news. [volume] (Paris, Ky.) 1895-19??, 1918-05-31

Weiss.
The information set forth was OBJ.
tanned through the usual channels
and feel sure you will have no diff
Guilty in corroborating it if you care
to do so.
Yours respectfully,
PARIS GAS & ELECTRIC CO.,
c. L. STEENBERGEN, Manager
Paris, KY, May s, 1918.
Mr.. c. L. Steenbergen,
Paris, KY.
Dear Strive wired you, on April
i, 1918, suggesting that you make
no further negotiations with Mr.
Weiss until advised from this office.
We regret very much that we were
compelled to decline to further nego-
tiate with the City of Paris, through
Mr. Weiss However, at the time OF
sending the telegram, we were in
possession of certain information
which convinced us that it would be
impossible for Mr.. Weiss to agree to
anything which would be fair and
just to the company.
We recognize the right of the City
Of Paris to select its own engineer
and we are willing to negotiate with
whomsoever the city may see fit to
designate, provided, however, the per-
son so selected is reputable engi-
neer of high standing in the profes-
sion.
When we received notice from the
City of Paris, advising us that the
city had employed Mr. Weiss, we
hn hof ha
met the requirements necessary to
qualify him to be fair and just in his
dealings with the Company, and
therefore, indicated our willingness
to go into the matter of discussing
the question of a fair price for a
new lighting contract.
We know nothing regarding the rep
utation and standing of Mr.. Weiss,
and of course, knew nothing about
the nature of his contract at the time
we consented to meet him, as the rep
resentative of the City.
Shortly after indicating our will
ingness to negotiate through Mr..
Weiss, We learned that his contract
with the city was so grossly unprofeS-
sional and piratical, as to utterly dis
qualify him to act fairly and justly
in his dealings with the Company.
We have endeavored to make proper
investigation of the qualifications and
standing of Mr.. Weiss, since advising
you to discontinue negotiations, but
the result of our efforts along this
line has been very unsatisfactory:
Cd Mr.. Weiss, in notifying the
company of his employment by the
City of Paris, used stationery indi-
eating that w. H. Weiss was q con-
sulting engineer of Kansas City, Mo-,
with temporary address at 416 indie
pendent Life Bldg, Nashville, Tenn.
We acted on the assumption that we
would be able to get some informa.
ton as to the qualifications and
standing of Mr.. Weiss, in Kansas
City, and were surprised to find that
he was wholly unknown to the men,
bers of the engineering profession of
that city, and while he may main
tain an Office of some kind in Kansas
City, we have so far been unable to
find anyone there able to locate it for
us.
(2) In response to one of our in
Quiries as to the reputation and
standing of Mr.. w. H. Weiss, our at
tention was directed to the fact that
the Public Service Commission of the
State of Missouri, in the case of Cole
VS.. Fort Scott & Nevada Light, Heat
& Water Company, decided November
IL, 1913, reported in Volume /, at
Pages 130-190, both inclusive, made
an order directing the company to re-
move one w. III. Weiss as general.
manager. In the order referred to.
the Missouri Commission uses the
following language:
That the Commission has de-
termined and ascertained that the
acts and conduct of w. H. Weiss,
the general manager of defendant
company, towards the consumers
OF defendant company, in the City
of Nevada, Missouri, make him an
unf1t and incompetent person for
defendant company to have in
charge OF its Offices and business in
said City, as general manager,
and directs and orders defendant
company to remove said w. H.
weiss as general manager, within
forty days after the effective date
OF this order, and to employ some
competent. person as its general
manager, who will render to the
consuming public of said City,
fair, just. and courteous treat.
ment as such general manager for
defendant company"
1t is true that in passing upon
the motion for a re-hearing in the
Nevada case. the Public Service Com
mission expressed doubt as to its
right to remove Mr.. Weiss on juris-
dictional grounds, but refused to
modify its views touching the quail
i1icationS and sfaud;nU of M. uy-.-