The Bourbon news. [volume] (Paris, Ky.) 1895-19??, 1918-05-31
moval of Mr.. Weiss as manager of the
Nevada nrOnerfY. 80. -


Nevada property:
| II am still of the opinion that
the conduct of Mr.. Weiss in his
business relations with the peo-
pie of Nevada, who were custom
ers of the Water Company was
oppressive, overbearing and mex
cusably arbitrary. However, "a
more thorough consideration OF
the case, on the motion for re-
hearing, has caused me to doubt
the soundness of that part of the
opinion, regarding Weiss re-
moval, and / think it should be
| modified in that respect"
We do not know whether the w,
H. Weiss now seeking to represent
the City of Paris, as a municipal
public utility expert, is the same w.
H. Weiss mentioned in the Nevada
case or not. If, however, the w. H.
Weiss mentioned in the Nevada case,
and the w. H. Weiss now seeking to
| represent the City of Paris, is the
same individual, then it certainly fol-
lows that our company would not be
expected to negotiate with a person
who has been found to be "oppres-
sive, overbearing and inexcusably
arbitrary" in a hearing before an
impartial States Commission.
CD The fact that w. H. Weiss
was unknown to the profession OF
Kansas City, in connection with the
further fact that we were unable to
locate his Office in Kansas City, made
it impossible for us to get any line on
the reputation and standing of this
party in Missouri, unless it should
develop that the w. H. Weiss referred
to in the Nevada case should prove
to be the same individual now seek
ing to represent the City of Paris.
(4) In addition to the line of in
quiry made in Missouri, with the re-
suit above mentioned, we also made
further inquiry in Kentucky and
Tennessee, as to the reputation and
standing of w. H. Weiss, of Nash
vile, Tenn, as a municipal public
utility expert.
Our reports from Kentucky and
Tennessee show that man by the
name of w. H. Weiss has been very
active recently in both of these
States, in an effort to bring about
discord between a number of public
utilities and their respective commu-
mites, by creating, or attempting to
create in the minds of the city offici-
ais and the public generally, the i'm
preston that the rates paid to pub
lie utilities are entirely too high,
should be revised downward, and
that for a percentage of the savings,
covering period of years, he wv. H.
Weiss) would bring about an adjust
ment by the peaceful cooperation
of the company.
AS evidence of the character of the
activities of the w. H. Weiss refer
tion to the following transactions:
(a) We have report from Column
bia, Tenn, stating that a gentleman
by the name of W. H. Weiss came to
that city in the early part of the
year 1915, and offered his services to
the city in an effort to obtain a new
contract with the Water and Light
Company of said city. According to
our report, Mr.. Weiss did not have a
contract with the City of Clumbia,
and in discussing the question of
compensation to be paid him, repeat
edly stated that he was going to &C
cept for his services whatever
the Board of Mayor and AL
dermen of the City of Columbia
he was entitled to.
The report relative to the Column
bia transaction further showed that
Mr.. Weiss later ignored the represen-
tations above mentioned, regarding
hn fn no 70 hi
for his services, and mailed state
ment to the City of Columbia for
s26, for alleged services rendered
by him as the representative of the
city, in its dealings with the Water
and Light Company.
According to the report, the City Of
Columbia disregarded the statement |
for $26,000.00, for alleged services |
rendered to said City, whereupon Mr.. |
Weiss appeared before the Board of |
Mayor and Aldermen of said City and |
again admitted that he had no con-
tract with the city and suggested |
that the city give him such compen-
sation as the officers of said city |
thought he was entitled to. The |
manner in which Mr.. Weiss imposed |
his services upon the City of Column
oia, and the ease with which he
could shift the alleged value of his
we think, is some indication
Of the type of the man who repre-
,ented the City of Columbia.
After statement of the method
IF employment, representations as to
rendering of bill for
s26, 100000, ETC., the report from the
City of Columbia contains the follow
ng relative to the question of fees:
''The matter dragged along for
some time, he making offers of |
compromise through his attorney,
which were rejected by the city,
and short time ago, his attorney
offered to settle all claims Mr..
Weiss had against the city for
S3,500.00 The city has offered to
pay him $2,500.00. That is the
situation at this writing; Weiss
offering to take $4,000, and the
city offering to give him $4,000.
Mr.. Weiss has not as yet insti-
tuted any suit against the city"
We do not know whether the Mr..
Weiss who performed at Columbia.
Tenn, as above indicated is tho