Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1918-04-30
RATE-F|X|NG POWER
IS FULLY ARGUED
Cities Contend That Rates Stip-
ulated in Franchises Arc
Binding.
TEST CASE is IMPORTANT
Attorneys for Virginia Railway
and Power Company Inter
ested Auditors.
TEST CASE Is IMPORTANT

Exhaustive discussion as to tho :u-
Commission over the rates charged tho
public by public service corporations
other than steam railroads. in cases
where the franchises granted by citic,
or counties put limit on the rates
was had before tho commission yes
tcrday. The case was that OF the
Virginia Western Power Company.
serving many communities in Rock
bridge and Allegheny Counties with
electric light and power which con.
corn tlod list of new and higher
rates with tho Corporation Commis-
sion. effective April |. 1t was con.
tended by tho towns and cities that
the commission has no Jurisdiction
when maximum rates have already
been fixed by local franchise.
in the meantime. the case took an
other turn yesterday when the cities
and towns filed petitions with Judge
Richard :. Kcr. Of the Corporation
Court OF Staunton. asking for injunc-
tion against the Virginia Western
Power Company to prevent it's chars-
ing in its May bills. which will lie
sent out Tomorrow, its new rates as
prescribed for in the April tariff flcd
with tho Corporation Commission. !,
Is assumed that no muttcr how the
Corporation Commission or Judge Ker
may decide the question of jursdic-
tSn, 1t Will eventually In either case
reach the Supreme Court OF Appeals
for final adjudication on appeal.
MANY COUNSEL. TAKE
PART IN ARGUMENT
Argument yesterday before the com
mission was made by former Senator
Floyd w. King and j. VI. Perry. for
tho Virginia Western Power Company;
by o. B. Harvey and John w. Bear.
for the city of Clifton Forge: by Ricn-
ard {. Stokes. for the town of Covins-
ton; by Frank Moore and O. IL. Jacksoa,
for the town OF Lexington; BY IL. s
Ruclier, for the city OF Bucna Vista.
and by William L. Allen. for the Dixie
Lumber Company. The last named
concern occupies peculiar position.
in that il agrees with the company
that the Corporation Commission has
Jurisdiction. because it wants the COM
mission. rather than tho communities.
20 protect its interests with the power
company.
1t was contended by the attorneys
representing the various communities
that the franchises granted by them
to the company are contracts. which
cannot be impaired without violation
OF the State and Federal Constitutions
The argument was that the General
Assembly. following the language o.
the Constitution. specifically delegated
ratc-makinS power to cities, towns and
counties in the granting of franchises
TO public corporations. Ny. Harvey
stressed the point that it would De
contrary - reason 10 suppose that 4
city. town or county could. after ad-
vcrt!sinS its franchise and selecting
the successful bidder. make an agree
ment for the benefit of its citizens in
which the rates were fixed then be
subjected TO revision OF these rates
within few weeks or months at the
hands of the state Corporation Com
mission. These franchises. or con-
tracts. he said once made. cannot be
disturbed by any power. not even by
the General Assembly