Show I STATE LOSES TELEPHONE POWER RATE CASES GASES Mountain States Company Is Is Victor in iii Fight to Prevent Pro Pre re- re vent Logan Slash WIDE STATE T WIDE CASE PENDING Court Rules Boards Board's Bo rd s' s Claim Without Merit 1 5 10 Upholding a company con contention nUon that tha reduction of ot Logan telephone rates would accelerate confiscation a three judge federal court ourt Thursday granted the Mountain States Stales Telephone Telephone Tele Tee phone and Telegraph company an Interlocutory injunction against the Utah public utilities commission The company is victor In a court fight to prevent the commission from froni enforcing ap order to lo reduce resIdence residence resi dence denee party one and two-party two telephone tele le- le phone rates at Logan Loan to a parity with those at Provo The case was taken under advisement advisement advise advise- ment meet by the court on June 14 H after a hearing conducted before Robert E. E Lewis presiding Judge of the Tenth circuit court of appeals Judge Judg Sam G. G Bratton of ot the circuit court and Judge Tillman D. D Johnson of federal district court Ordered Ordena to Reduce Rates The decision was written by Judge Lewis and concurred in by the others Milton Smith of Denver chief co counsel for Ifor the utility and W W. Q Van ran Cott local counsel for the company and John D. D Rice deputy deputy deputy dep dep- uty attorney g general represented the state The commission action April 11 II ordered the company to reduce e on cn party one pa party t r rates t from Irom 3 t to a month and two party charges f from to The e commission upheld a charge by Logan residents that they the we were being discriminated against In favor of Provo where they claimed similar similar simi simi- lar conditions existed They also cited populations of the two cities are comparable Held Without Merit MerU The three-Judge three court ruled it regarded regarded re reo re- re without merit a claim 4 by Continued on e Two IWO CUT GUT IN POWER RATE RA R IS DENIED Federal Court Upholds Telluride Telluride Telluride ride Company in Ruling Continued from Face pau One hearing introduced In evidence an Income income in In- come statement of the company taken from annual reports from 1922 to 1932 1032 inclusive It stated in the report that the average rate of return for the 11 years was per cent the the- decision said During only two t of at those years year did the rate amount to more than 5 per cent and less than 6 per percent cent enl In two of ol the 11 years ears the rate in each was more than 4 i per cent and less than 5 per cent In five live of the 11 years it was in each more more- than 3 per cent but less than 4 per cent and in two years the yield in each was less than 3 per ce cent t arid and not more than 3 per percent cent centa It a follows that for at least 12 years beginning in 1922 the old rates were never sufficient to yield a reasonable return Rates Bates tes' tes Called Confiscate ry They have been throughout and were so at the time the he commission made made- the order reducing reducing re re- re- re them It cannot be Ibe said the plaintiff has not borne more than its part in sharing the effe effects ts of f I low w prices and nd the economic depression In the United Railway Electric company vs West it is said the fundamental principle to be observed Is s that the property of a public utilIty utility util util- ity to public service service ser ser- vice and impressed witha public in interest interest in- in erest terest terest is still private property and neither corpus of at property nor nor- use use there thereof hereof constitutionally can can be taken for or a compulsory price which fal falls below just compensation One is confiscation con con- no less than than- the other A uA writ of injunction may issue staying the execution of or the order until final Inal hearing The bond given by the plaintiff when the restraining order was W issued extends to final linal of ot the caSe case in protection of the the- rights of the e plaintiffs plaintiff's customers cus cus- S The company was represented at atthe atthe atthe the hearing before the three judge court by H. H R. R Waldo and W. W.- Q Van Cott ott John D. D Rice Itice appeared for forthe forthe the he utilities commission |