The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-02-13
HIGHWAY BOARD DECIDES ON NEW PAVING TYPES
Action Is Taken After Contractors Enter
 United Protest
tsrATE CAPITOL BUREAU)

M MONTGOMER1, Ala, teb. IS.- |Elay and cement, concrete, asphalt and |foncrete rock asphalt and brick pave
 nent were decided on as paving types
 bn the Birmingham -Montgomery high |Eay stretch in Chiffon county at tRe
 Tuesday morning session of the state highway commission. sThe stretch of road in question is about IT miles in length, and bids will be considered on oasis of the specifications fixed today. Modification of the specifications for paving bids on the 17-mile stretch of the Montgomery Birmingham highway in Chiffon county was asked of the Etate highway commission at it's meet ling Monday afternoon by representa- Hives of several paving concerns. Ac-. |Eording to these under the present Specifications no other type of paving
 tan hope to compete with concrete. Among those appearing before the |eommission was John Donaldson of Bir- |mingham, who asked that specifications |pe changed 50 as to give asphalt and |bther types of paving a chance for the |buccessful bid. He pointed to the |hsphalt paved streets of Montgomery
 
 |Huring a period of IT years.
 Herbert Warren, representing the |Warnite paving process was present as was Evans Dunn of Birmingham, Representative of the Dunn ConIruc- |kion company. A. J. Fitzwalter Fepre-
 tented Texas paving concern which |proposes to use Alabama rock asphalt lin the construction of roads in this btate. E. G. Berneike represented the |Southern Clay Manufacturing company, which has two plants near Birming- |ham turning out vitrified brick. Protest Service Charge Two gallons of kerosene poured into |khe gas pipes relieved an insufficiency |bf gas pressure which had cost her hun |hreds of dollars worth of food damage because the fire in her gas range used Ito go out at, critical times, Mrs. R. G. |Eregg testified Tuesday before the pub |lic service commission. That body is holding hearings on the reasonableness of gas rates now being charged con sumers in Montgomery.
 | Mrs. Gregg testified she had expe- rienced trouble with gas pressure both |before and after the Alabama Power |eompany took charge of the electric and gas utilities in Montgomery in Febru-
 hry, 1923.
 It was remedied last October, she says, by two men from the power com
 pany employing the kerosene to clear
 the pipes. Mrs. Gregg also complained of the
 service charge of $2 month imposed |by the company on consumers regardless of cubic feet of gas they use.
 s'Tyanfy-fnnr do1Iara iu Thigh price to pay for a couple gallons of kerosene and 20 minutes work of two semployes of the power company" she Mold the commission. Perry Turner, counsel for the power company, in- formed Mrs. Gregg that the charge of FS2 a month was not for maintenance 1 of the gas pipe in good condition but was fee imposed on the consumers |by the utilities company for having its l gas always at their disposal. | She replied to this that she ran q
 monthly account at a dry goods store lin Montgomery and that their bills lwere always for goods actually pur- |chased, with no service charge" Hacked on.
 k. l.. Todd, whose home like the Rrooming house conducted by Mrs. Gregg, lis in the heart of the city, also com plained of insufficient gas pressure. He j likewise protested against the $2
 monthly service charge as making the consumer pay for something he did not get. E. W. Wadsworth, suburban tdweller, also objected to the service charge, but said he had no complaint l to make on the gas pressure at his ! home.
 Gas Case Appealed
 Certificate of appeal was filed Tues l Hay with the clerk of the supreme court ! in the case of the Woco Pep company , pf Montgomery vs. W. A. Gunter, Jr.,
 1t al., in the Montgomery circuit court I in equity. The appeal is taken from a
 iecree of Judge Walter B. Jones issued
 January % and denying a temporary injunction restraining W. A. Gunter,
 Dr., as mayor of Montgomery from col
 lectins an additional tax on the sale of
 gasoline imposed by the city commission ! of Montgomery. The supreme court begins on May 12
 next considering cases from the third siivision, which includes Montgomery
 rounty, and it is not likely that the
 tourt will proceed in the matter until 4this time