The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1931-01-30
UTILITY GROUP
GETS SETBACK
IN HOUSE VOTE.
Judiciary A Committee Re-
port Rejected by
1929 Count.
KISTLER'S IRE RoUSED
Author of Bills Asserts He
Was Denied Chance to
Explain Measures.

Utility forces in the house Of rep
resentatiyes received their first
sharp defeat in several sessions to-
day, when members voted 1929 to
reject the unanimous report Of
judiciary A committee and pass on
to second reading the measures
which would revolutionize rate fix
ing methods.
Charges that he had not been
given opportunity to appear before
the committee and explain his bills,
although promised that this would
be granted, we're made by Repre-
sentative Cecil j. Kistler (Rep,
Elkhart), who, with Edward E.
Eikenbary (Dem, Wabash, is an
author of the companion measures.
Utility rate making methods used
by the public service commission
were scored by Kistler, who asked:
Have you seen a public utility ap-
plying to the commission for a re-
duction Of rates during this depres-
sion? Every other business has
brought down the price of its COM
modities.
Hits Partican Stand
Party lines are immaterial when
1t comes to a question of regulating
the utility business. We all, whether
Democrat or Republican, must buy
water, gas, and electricity This is
a public question"
The debate was precipitated when
the committees unanimous report
for indefinite postponement for the
FIRST of the two measures was read.
This bill provided that valuations
for rate making purposes shall be
on the basis of original cost of
equipment and. materials, less de-
probation, instead of the present
method of computing rates on the
reproduction value.
It also orders that no utility shall
manufacture or sell apparatus or
articles designed to consume its
product if the property and plant
used for such manufacture or the
overhead for selling is included in
the valuation of the utility when
rates are being fixed.
Changes Court Procedure
The bill would have appeals from
decisions Of the public. service COM
mission taken to the state supreme
court and from there to the United
States supreme court. instead of to
the federal district court, as at pres
ent.
The first bill would abolish the
public service commission while the
second re-enacts the law with the
changes.
Kistler explained his bill and
asked that the measure be sent on
to second reading. despite the OPP
position report of the judiciary A
committee.
Fabius Gwin (Dem., Dubois and
Martini, committee chairman, ex-
planned that the bills had been
turned over to a special committee
for consideration, which reported
that they were unavoidable. He de-
clared they should be sent back tn
another committee for consider
alton.
KiStler rose to his feet and shout
ed: II think that if 1 lad been
given chance to appear before the
committee there would not have
been a unanimous report. Gwin
promised me chance to appear be-
fore his committee, but 1 didn't get
at.
Charges Delay Sought
THE only reason Gwin wants il
sent back to another committee is
for delay"
The roll call showed that the
committee report was reversed ano
Delphi L. McKesson (Dem., Mar
shalD declared: "A remarkable
thing has happened. Kistler could
have appeared before the commit
tee for five years and would not
have obtained favorable recon-
mendation. The bills are not
workable
But the house, by voice vote
passed both measures on to second
reading