OCR Text |
Show I ARE fill!.: UTILITY COMMISSIONS" :f REALLY BENEFICIAL AND NECESSARY? i SENATOR SEEGMILLER OF THIS DISTRICT SAYS YES The Senator Says He Has Been Converted to the Necessity of a Commission, and Asks Mr. Peet to Explain His Interest in Opposing Measure. , (Knnc County News.) . L In the Iron County Record of May 6, appears an article by V. S. Peet, i under the Caption, "As To Public f Service Commissions." V The argument therein used is so il- ,j.' -v logical that it is hardly worth space fir- for any reply or comment from nny- " ;. one whose name is therein mentioned. - ffi Rut since Mr. Peet takes occasion to say that I voted against the Public Utilities Bill in the last legislature, I ' consider that I should make my posi tion clearly understood before my constituents. con-stituents. I voted apainst the measure, first of all, because I was not thoroughly con- . verted to the merits of the bill as it 1 was presented before the Senate. ,', . Secondly, because it appeared to me ' that it was a simple quarrel between the Orcm and the D. & R. G. railroads. " and the whole argument seemed to be based upon the question, whether or not the D. & R. G. should unload coal . s U at Provo to the Orcm Railroad, which , mf'- it wished to distribute between Provo If and Salt Lake City. Since then, the I two railroads have becomo reconciled ft and the Orem railroad, which was the I force behind the Public Utilities bill f in the last legislature, is nt this time i r rather indifferent to the proposition of i public utilities lepislation. I Further than this, I have learned 1. some things in the last two years; and 'mf I hope to bo able to learn a few things Ml i,n the next two years. Through v ' studying the question of the public VHK utilities commission, and watching JH what has happened between the pub- R-4icand eome utUMeBrIhaYe'bervmi Vr thoroughly converted to the need of !&, a public utilities commission in this tVB ' state. , jHfti Mr. Peet states that Salt Lake MHEtf county, in its recent trouble with the vS Mountain States Telegraph and Tolo- v phone Company has proved beyond If , question that a public utilities com- 1? . mission is unnecessary. Will Mr. Peet I or anybody else argue that the best ml way for people to settle differences be- IlV tween themselves and the telephone L- company is for the people to be com- i polled to hold indignation 'nicetings, to cut their wires and throw their phones l' in the street, to hang phones by the , dozens on telegraph poles; and there- m by injure and damage tho telephone W system and all the citizens who are ' compelled to use it, to such an extent " that finally tho telephone company is compelled to give Just and adequate ( i service? ', Mr. Peet also states that the thing ' ',' a public utility most dreads is com- ; ', petition by tho public. Does he mean '"' ' that every time we are mistreated by ' i t '"' a public utility that the people must . construct or threaten to construct a $". in service? One would judge from the .9 ., in sedvico? One would judge from the "'" ' reading of the article by Mr. Peet that the author considers that a public I utility commission would be an enemy to the public utility companies. That it would only be meant to make corpor- ! ations bend tho knee. But the fact is I I that the commission would of necessity be an unbiased state commission appointed ap-pointed to adjust differenced between ! ' tho public and the servants, and that it - 4 .- would bo the duty of the commission I r to protect tho public utility just as jj S. much as it would bo tho duty of the I jr- commission to protect tho public. j i.V The point Mr. Peet malccs on the l& ' commission being treated to American i R Beauty and Sunnybrook ponies and IE Royal Havana fillers, and all such tom- j F myrot argumont, will not weigh very (" heavily with the thinking citizen I ,V ' Does Mr. Peet imagine for a minute , I . that tho last legislature was not wined I and dined and given joy rides and ; theatre tickets, and all this sort of I I- thing, and would that be an argument 1 It for the abolition of the state legisla- 1 ? ture? And has he forgotten that the ja ' legislature with an overwhelming vote i- - passed a prohibition bill directly in S opposition to the wishes of tho people I , who were paying the expenses of the i wining and dining and tho joyridos and 4 theatre tickets? And to say that we a "', ennmic navo a public utilities com- .1 ' mission that would live above such 3 j, potty bribery would bo to put an ox- M cecdingly small measure upon man W hood of Utah. He mentions the ex- W penae of the thing. I don't suppose ho has over investigated the expense 2 of tho political machines we already V HYki Without quoting figures, I in- i yiifiyour attention to the expense of omTstato government, and ask you to look In the session laws of tho last legislature and see what tho Governor's Gover-nor's office alone Is costing us. Compare Com-pare it with our expense of onlv a few years ago in tho Governor's offico, anc then compare Utah's expense for ad ministration with othor states pf her population and assessed valuation: and I am Bure that you wll agree with mo that we could very wisely reduce these imicjiaos to a sufficient amount (Cdlvttnu'od ou ctflurau 4.) (Continued from column 1.) .unBiovldo th? exPenao of public utilities commission, without increasing increas-ing our burden of taxation, to say nothing of what tho public utilities commission might auve the public in the adjustment of differences and tho reduction and control of rates and charges. It would not bo extravagent at all to say that tho commission could save to tho people the amount of its running expenses. In closing, I wish to say that I, have become converted to a public utilities commission, and I hope always to be liberal minded enough to accept tho right when it has been shown and can bo understood. I should like, also, to ask Mr. Peet h. Limi 80 act,Yc,y "Prosing a public pub-lic utilities commission. Is it because of his lovp for tho public, because of his great intorest in their welfare? or could it bo possible that he is employed by some corporation? I remember very distinctly that he spent many days and weeks in the last legislature SJ.WF a'fa,n8,t tho nubile utilities bill. Was this simply because without remuneration he was willing to work tor the best interests of the peoplo, or was ho employed by somebody to do what he could against tho bill? Naturally, Nat-urally, we look to tho motive, and if Mr. Peet would, he could easily Bet our minds at rest on this point. W. W. SEEGMILLER. |