The Penn's Grove record., 1920-10-22

0llAlllCo SCI dolhC NCRACNidNiVh
fund and prevent the expenditure Of
this fund for any purpose other than
depreciation, etc.
They have permitted and allowed
some companies to divert from the de-
probation fund so that large dividends
might be paid.
They have not attempted to force
such companies to refund said money
to depreciation account.
They have shown undue bias and
favoritism and discrimination toward
subsidiary corporations of the Public
Service Corporation and against other
smaller similar corporations in other
parts Of New Jersey by setting for
such small corporations a valuation of
the companies properties and limiting
he rates so that they will afford not
over 6 per cent thereon, while they
have allowed the Public Service Elec-
tric Company to increase rates as to
afford s per cent on such capital stock
without any valuation to determine
whether such stock would be entitled
to said return.
That they have delayed over a long
period the valuation of the property of
the Public Service Railway Company
and the Public Service Electric Com
pany, while holding other and smaller
companies to a prompt conclusion o.
their respective valuations.
That in fixing electric light rates for
the Public Service Electric Company
they have allowed said company to
make retroactive the rates so fixed.
Detested Zones Fare Scheme.
That they have, put into force upon
the Public Service Railway within one
year seven different rates of fare with
ont any sufficient reason therefor and
without testing any of said rates by
the rule of 6 per cent upon the vaIua-
ton, which was applied to other cor
porations.
That they have inaugurated several
different one experiments upon all of
the street railways of the Public Ser
vice Railway Company without proper
reason therefor.
That they have Disseminated be-
tween different municipalities by pre-
scribing varying rates of fare for
school children.
That they have failed to discharge
the duty imposed upon them by the
utility statute Of recommending
changes in the utility law.
That they have allowed moneys rails
ed upon bond issues for construction
OF permanent improvements to be d.
verted to the account Of working capt.
tai.
That they have so administered the
public utility statute as to establish
the practice Of unnecessarily long, te-
dious, expensive processes.
That they, knowing the facts, in fix
ing rates and valuation employed ex-
perts who were undoubtedly biased
and committed to the corporations
point of view.
That they have disseminated be-
tween corporations in granting
promptly the application of the Public
Service Companies for increased rates
within a few weeks after said appli-
totiolio NCiC IidtC. Willie III case VI
the New York Telephone Company,
closed in December, 1910, is still I'M
decided.
That the facts disclosed show that
the members Of the utility board have
been guilty of neglect and misconduct
in office and also that they have lost
the confidence of the public.
Justice Swayze in Jersey City heard
argument Oh the application of the
Board of Public Utility Commissioners
for a writ Of certiorari to halt the ex-
ecution of the order issued by Cover
nor Edwards removing the members
from office.
The ousted commissioners contend
that there was no evidence presented
by the municipality of Jersey City to
prove the charges of misconduct in Of
flee and neglect of duty made against
the commission and that In conse-
quence the governor had no warrant
in removing them from office.
1t is further contended by the com
missiOners that the governors action
in ousting them was beyond his ilris-
diction and that his findings against
them were contrary to the weight of
the evidence. They dispute the gov
ernor's claim that the statute of 1911.
creating the utility board, conferred
upon the governor judicial powers, in
sisting that the legislature never had
authority to bestow such powers.
The deposed utility commissioners
are represented in the supreme court
proceedings by Joseph Stryker, L. Ed
ward Hermann, Richard V. Lindaburv
and former Judge William L. Lewis.
George l.. Record and Marshall Van
Wrinkle are opposing the action.
viii Vote Tunnel Bonds.
Governor Edwards has no doubt of
the adoption by the voters of his state
at the coming election of the PROPOSE
ton to issue bonds to the value of
S2S,O0O,000 to pay New Jerseys share
~ H. 49,.