Evening star., 1934-04-27
PHONE CASE SETS
RECORD AS 4-DAY
ARGUMENTS END
Question Involving $685..
600 Annual Saving on Bills
Up to Judge Adkins.
LONG ORAT0RY DUE
To COMPLICATIONS
!. c. c. and Local Commission
Contest Over Jurisdiction
Important Phase.

After one Of the longest arguments
on record, encompassing four days of
oratory, the telephone rate case is now
before Justice Jesse C. Adkins of Dis
trict Supreme Court for decision.
The stake In the case is approxi-
mately $350,000 per annum in reduced
telephone bills. ordered by the Public
Utilities Commission in 1892 and re-
sisted by the Chesapeake g. Potomac
Telephone Co. ever since. The COM
mission ordered the company to cut
monthly bills for service, except for
private branch exchange service, 10
per cent. The company has given
bond to meet this reduction should
the courts finally decide against it.
The prolonged argument was neces-
sary because of the many complicated
issues coming up in the one case
Among these was a contest between
the Interstate Commerce Commission
and the local commission as to which
has jurisdiction over depreciation
rates for the company. The COM
mission. in arriving at the conclusion
that rates should be cut, found that
the company had been setting up toe
much money for depreciation out o,
operating expenses. and that II in
future it set up less, then 1t would be
able to make the reduction in bills.
Company Contention.
The company replied that the com.
, mission had nothing whatever to dc
with depreciation rates, and the /. C
! c. filed brief in support of the com.
panys contention.
Another bone Of contention was as
to whether the. commission should
/ have given the company credit in It's
valuation for an item Of going con-
cern value" claimed by the company
to amount to some 100000. The
| commission held that In arriving al
its final value figures. 1t had valued
the company as going concern, anc
that therefore it was unnecessary tc
state any separate sum for this item
During the course of the argumen,
! yesterday afternoon Justice Adkin:
said that he believed the Supreme
Court decisions made mandatory some
separate allowance for going concern
value. - ~ r..
George p. Hoover, one of the com.
pany lawyers, in his argument yes
| terday, relied strongly on the fact
| that the commission had made nc
finding that the rates the company i:
charging subscribers are "unreaSon.
| able or unjust" He said that the
primary duty and right to fix rates i:
in the company. and that the COM
mission may only order the rates de.
| creased II 1t finds them unreasonably
high. II the rates are not unreason.
ably high. he contended. then the
commission has no power to cut them
even If reduced rates would still yield
a reasonable return on the company's
| value.
Responsibility Of Court.
He said that the commission having
failed to make this finding. the court
could not sustain the reduction unless
the court was prepared to make a
| finding of its own. after listening
to the evidence, that the rates are
unreasonably high.
The case for the company has been
argued by Mr.. Hoover, r. A. Van
Orsdel and Baxter Milne. and for
the commission by Assistant Corpora
ton Counsel William A. Roberts. AT
its conclusion Mr.. Roberts passed up
an opportunity to get his picture in
the papers.
A reporter had asked all of the
lawyers in the case to pose for a
picture. Mr.. Roberts, however, after
coming out of the court house, de-
clined to appear in the same pic
ture with the lawyers of the oppo-
sition. They urged him to pose with
them, but he remained firm. I'll
let you make one of me-" he said
but not with the telephone COM
pany lawyers"