Show ATTITUDE OF COUNCILMEN Terms on Which They Will Grant a Franchise If Elmer B Jones or the people he represents under the name of the Home Telephone company desire to press their application for a franchise they must take cognizance of the present attitude of City Councilmen Twelve members of that body were present at last nights special Council meeting and each one expressed himself to a Tribune reporter upon the subject of the Jones franchise In particular and telephone franchises In general The absentees were Davis Canning and Bcatty Of the dozen two In the light of recent developments say they are opposed to granting any franchise to the present applicants All of them say they are In favor of gratitlng a franchise for a competing telephone system to a responsible corporation and the majority will grant n franchise fran-chise to the Home company providing It will Incorporate prove the responsibility respon-sibility of its backers and put up at the time the franchise Is granted an adequate guarantee that its provisions will be compiled with The consensus of opinion was that the franchise was a marketable commodity of considerable consider-able value and that tt1 should not be granted free to anyone who wanted to determine whether It could be sold or made to pay before accepting tho franchise Jn other words the guar anted must be paid not after accep lance but when the franchise Is grafted graft-ed contingent upon acceptance Several Sev-eral of the Councilmen expressed thti belief that the Rocky Mountain Bell Telephone companys charges arc excessive ex-cessive 4 Ck The questions asked of each wore Would you favor granting a franchise fran-chise to Mr Jones or the Home com rrnny on their agreement to put up a 15000 guarantee after acceptance oC the franchise and Arc you In favor of a competing telephone company The answers follow Buckle I dont think the city ought to give anybody a marketable commodity com-modity without having a guarantee that It will be properly used This franchise is a marketable commodity and the city ought to be protected by an assurance at the time the franchise fran-chise Is granted that it is a bona fido propOsition and will be prosecuted to completion I am In favor of competition com-petition S Thomas chairman of joint committees commit-tees considering the franchises No sir they have played shuttlecock with the Council and I would not be In favor fa-vor of grunting a franchise Hammer Ham-mer or the Webster and Waterbury people JC responsible parties would apply for a franchise and would demonstrate dem-onstrate that their application was made In good faith In the interests of the public the application would be entitled to favorable consideration There Is no question that the rates charged business men at present arc too high Hartensteln Jones on his own admission received 250 for attorneys fees from Mr Murray of the Bell company com-pany He came here and proposed to establish competition to buck that company and to perform any service for them was an evidence of bad faith For that reason I would not favor grunting him a franchise but because of the high rales and poor service of the Bell company I would vote to grant a franchise to any responsible competitor compet-itor Tuddcnham They must incorporate show who their backers are and put up the guarantee when the franchise is granted or they will get no consideration considera-tion from me i favor a competing system sys-tem C R Howe I believe In making them put up the money when they get the franchise This spending the time of two committees considering franchises fran-chises that are not wanted malted me tired Two telephone systems would be good for the city Jt Is not a good plan to let any person or corporation have a filch on anything like the Rocky Mountain Hell company has I must admit that I am not favorably Impressed with the present applicants Robertson am pot In favor of giving giv-ing Mr Jones a franchise unless he proves the responsibility of his back qrw and puts up a guarantee at the time the franchise Is granted and contingent con-tingent upon acceptance of the franchise fran-chise I think that 5000 would perhaps is per-haps be enough to show good faith It would not do to grant a franchise free and give the parties time before acceptance ac-ceptance to find whether backing or patronage could be doutircd or the franchise sold out I have expressed myself before as In favor of competition competi-tion S tionCottrcll Cottrcll have not looked Into the matter I am noncommittal on the subject of granting a franchise to a legitimate corporation but If It Is a matter of barter that Is If the fran cblae Is to be sold outI am unalterably unalter-ably opposed to It Fenustrom Let him put up the guarantee guar-antee first or show me the men who will put It up if the franchise Is granted Otherwise I would not grant him a franchise but would favor a franchise for any responsible party Reid The Home company will have to put up Its 515000 suaranico to get any confederation from me Franchise are too valuable to give awajMfor some man to speculate pti1 I favorcompetl 1 Lion but the parties proposing It must bo rcnponslble Vlilttcmorc If the Home company Still wants a franchise I would favor granting It but not unless the guarantee guaran-tee la put up when the franchise Is granted If the sum Is not put up until the franchise IB accepted It would give too much chance for speculating on the value of the franchise Hewlett would favor granting a franchise to a responsible competitor who will accept a franchise satisfactory satisfac-tory to the city and who will deposit his guarantee contingent upon acceptance ac-ceptance at the time the franchise Is 5 granted Edgar Howe If the people represented repre-sented by Jones will Incorporate and show good faith and responsible backing back-ing I would favor granting them a franchise I think the franchise Is a valuable one and we should have competition com-petition because the charges of the Rocky Mountain Bell company are exorbitant ex-orbitant and the service poor |