The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-07-16
BRADLEY CHARGES
 CITY IS |NS|NCERE
 AS ID CONF FERENCE
Receiver of Street Railway Takes Issue With City on Extent of Jurisdiction.
 Ready to Go Ahead

| the city was insincere in it's offer to consent to a conference between J. s. Pevear and I. w. Ross.
 MT, Bradley'ss letter was turned over to Walter S. Brown. assistant city attorney. who said last night he would confer with Forney Johnston, special counsel for the city in the | street railway case, as to what action would be taken by the city. Questions Jurisdiction MT. Bradley questions the jurisdic- tion of the city over reorganization, rates and budgets. He says the city has jurisdiction over track abandon ment, reroutng and franchise reN- sion incidentally necessary. | Unless the city will go forward in making a traffic survey with officials of the company, Independently of other features, the whole matter will be dropped by the receiver. he says. He asks the city for a declaration of | intentions. BradIey's Letter
 | MT. Bradleys letter. which reached the commission yesterday morning, | follows:
 "The Honorable Commission of the
 City of Birmingham, Birmingham, | Ala.
 "Gentlemen:
 q acknowledge receipt of yours of the 18th instant.
 The traffic survey was suggested by Messrs Johnston and Ross at the recent hearing before the Public Service commission as a measure of economy in operation, It's presentation was not connected with any of the other questions which are presented in your letter. The fact was developed that the revision of franchises was understood to be an incidental nec- essity to the abandonment of Tide water trackage and the operation Of Tidewater cars over the B. R. l.. x P. lines. l therefore supposed that the suggestion was made on US merits and quite apart from any or the other questions which have so l long been in complication. And l iii- formed you of my willingness to pro- ceed with the traffic survey on the suppostion that 1t might be consider ed by you as it was proposed py your. representatives. its merits and apart from other complications. Traffic Survey
 | J
 traffic survey is essential to any 1 proposal of reorganization as well as to a study of economy. You prom.
 ised in your letter of August, 1913.
 with a few days a formula of re- | organization but you did not then
 suggest that traffic survey was an l essential part of 1t. Indeed, traI- | fc survey was never suggested Tn any connection or at any time until | rifasr hafpra the DuDlIc | service commission. And 1t was not then suggested as in any way related l to reorganization, but as measure of economy available immediately and in advance of reorganization.
 "In my recent letter. l stated, 'ob- viously the plan cannot be worked out without complete cooperation between the city and the utilities in- | volyed' In your reply, you say
 Cooperation Necessary ".we note your suggestion that the closest cooperation between the city and the utility is essential Tn this study. It Is, of course, we'i taken. in our opinion, that necessity for cooperation NDplies not oniy to rerouting plans Sat to fundamenta1 rate changes, budgets, ana to .nS plan of reorganization since cohtro- versies affecting any of these h'a.ee.' necessarily TtdCL bPcii sion's attitude toward details We think that the traffic survey IS most important and should proceed put we call your attention to the lac' that your suggestion as to co-opoS tion cannot be. complete or "hoiS effective while fundamental contro- versies such as those relating 10 lrah chise conditions and pending pIo ceedings before the pupilc tct q
 .-You have no jurisdiction over re- organizations none over rates stnd nona over budgets. You have deli- nite jurisdiction over track apahuon- ment. rerouting and franchise resia ion incidentally necessary sun franchise revision as is necessary can be accomplished without preJuuice ~ the city,s Jurisdiction or even 10 US claims of Jurisdiction.
 Suggestion Irrelevant
 Your position in eftect IS en"l cannot cooperate Tn respeo. matter within your jursdiction-ah of vo,,r own suggestion-unles there be co-operation in respect or matters without your Jurisdiction. That pc ing so the suggestion was Whoiiy irrelevant to the issue before ,he public service commissioh' inueeu the survey, as you declare 'liae you view it. would simply serve 10 excuse further delay and add another com plication to a situation which aireaoy seems hopelessly involved,
 "If you are willing to go aheao with a traffic survey as a measure of economy on its own lndepenoeht merits as proposed by your repre- sentatiyes. I am ready, too. II you are not the organization has no time and the estate has no money to naz- ard on a venture which by your own warning seems hopeless.
 Entitled to Know
 .I did hope that when l accepted a matter suggested by your own rep resentatives that you would stand by their suggestion. But, if l understand your letter, it means that we cant do anything until we do everything, ana therefore, that we can do nothing. repeat that If you are ready to so ahead I am ready. too. If you are not. please advise when if at all. the formula of reorganization promised in your letter of August. 1919, is to be forthcoming, and when the valua- ton report of your engineer, so long delayed. is expected to be ready. think I am entitled to know whether you have definitely abandoned the formula and report mentioned, or whether you really intend some time to develop your ideas, and If so, when? Yours truly,