The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1927-01-08
ON
MERGER STUDIED
Continued From Page II

Continued From Page II
minority. His remarks conveyed an
impression of outside influence on
the council.
do you mean to say that one of
the council has been influenced by
utility menu" demanded Commission
err Clyde H. Jones.
Il didn't say" replied Boyce. IT
just told you the facts and you can
draw your own inference.
During the hearing Rucker an
nounced that he would withdraw
from the Chamber of Commerce i'm.
mediately. that the Chambers tao.
tics were too mucn for him.
The resolution adopted by the
Chamber of Commerce committee
was submitted to the public service
commissioners at p. m. Friday by
Matson, accompanied by Benjamin
Perlx, Chamber accountant, and Carl
Wilde, attorney for Champan- Price
Steel Company and the American
Foundry Company. Clarke and his
attorney, Carl Fl. Mote, were present.
Wait I'm Office
The members of the commission
had been requested by phone to wait
In their office and all were present
save Commissioner Clyde H. Jones.
The resolution was received and
the commissioners agreed to meet
today at 9 a. III. to consider the re-
quest.
Attorneys representing the pro-
testing groups not present at the
time were Immediately notified by
Wampler of the hearing today, with
the exception of William Bosom, for
whom a message was left at his
home.
Attorney Wilde declared his
clients, Chapman-Price Steel Com.
pany and the American Foundry
Company, agreeable to the compro-
mise.
This statement represents the de.
cision of the Chamber of Commerce
committee reached after careful con-
sideration." said Matson, represent
ing that body. land represents what
they consider to be the best thing
for the city of Indianapolis.
THE compromise proposed by the
Chamber of Commerce is the most
damnable outrage ever pushed on
the people of Indianapolis" Claude
E. Negley, president of the council,
said before the hearing this morning
opened. What right has the Am.
Der of Commerce to do such a thing?
Is 1t costing them So ,thing or is
1t making them something?"
Negley stated that he was so "sore"
over the turn the merger had taken
that he could hardly talk about It.
Why didn't they wait until Jan.
81 like, they promised and give the
people CHANGER" he asked. II will
fight this hellish merger with all my
power and Will use all of my influ-
ence to make others fight it."
Surprise to Rucker
The compromise between the
Chamber of Commerce and Clarke
is surprise to me-" Corporation
Counsel Alvah J. Rucker said before
the hearing. II thought that the
body was working for the interests
Of Indianapolis.
Rucker seemed very much discour.
aged.
CLARK probably will win now"
he said. But I will still fight the
merger. A 100000 bond doesn't
mean anything to Clark He could
forfeit the bond and make the money
back in two or three months. /
certainly will fight to the last ditch
that is so against Indian
apolis and Indianapolis people as
the merger is.
Boynton J. Moore. former council
asserted that he would OPP
pose the merger under any consider.
alton.
II am willing to cooperate with
the Chamber of Commerce in any
way but in their stand on the merger
question" he said. Take the cases
of the Indiana Bell Telephone Com
pany and of the gas company. After
the rates went away up. It
would be the same with this. I will
use all of my power as councilman
to fight this merger
Mayor Duvall said that while the
capitalization seemed a little too
high, yet it was immaterial If in
creases in rates have been prevented
by guaranteed agreement. With
the deposit to be forfeited in case of
request for increased rates, the plan
is acceptable to him, he said.
A. lie Roy Portteus. president of
the Indianapolis Federation of Com.
munity Clubs declared his organia-
ton was opposed to any compromise.
''The action of the Chamber is sur
prise to me-" sair PortteuA. 81 had
no reason to believe. that a compro-
mise was even considered. l think
IL is wrong for the utilities and for
the general public"
William Bosson, representing GER
tain consumers, taxpayers and labor
declared, "Such COM
promise will not be good for the city
and certainly not for the consumer"