OCR Text |
Show IPOWERREfilE PLAN OPPOSED; Section of Public Utilities; ! Law Attacked by Power Company SALT LAKE. Nov. 16 Violent attack at-tack of that section of the public utilities utili-ties law which provides that the commission com-mission may determine the amount of reparation which a public utility shall pay a patron whom It has overcharged, and which provides that the courts may, if necessary, enforco tho orders of the eommi.-j.slon In this regard, was 'made In a motion filed with the corn-1 mission yesterday by the Utah Power A Light compiny The statute Is declared to violate' at least two sections of tho state con- stitutlon and tho fourteenth amend-1 ment to the federal constitution, to be retroactive and to bo such that lt enforcement In the instant case would compel tho utility to render lt.self Mr- ble to a dally fine of $2,000; and the claim of the Utah-Idaho Central Kail-road Kail-road company is declared to be beyond the lurlsdletlon of the rommis.slon ex cept that that body may legally d Is-1 mlrts the claim. The railroad company formerly held a special contract with the Utah Power & Light company whereby It bought Its power under o rate different from that charged consumers not holding such special contracts This was attacked at-tacked by the commission, which, after af-ter a lengthy hcarlnpr, ordered the railroad companv'H bill to be placed on tho regular schedule ratlnp n,s on file with the commission. This was by an order issued In March, 1921. The commission, however, qualified this loider. so far as Inlorurban railroad; were concerned, to tho extent that. If' ; later investigation should shov, that' the rates and regulations of tho power company were not adapted to railroad' operation, the Commission would rc-,1aln rc-,1aln Jurisdiction of the case and modify: Ithe rates and rules governing suchl consumers Under this order the railroad com-' panles were on the regular schedules' for rather more than one year, and I then, after a hearing, the commission dropped the rate3 charged by modify-. Ing the rule for the fixing of the demand de-mand charge paid l the railroad com- ! panles. l ins soconu oruer was iouowcu d an action brought by tho Utah-Idaho (Central for a refund of the difference between Its actual payments for tho period during which it was on regular schedule and the amount that bill 'would have been had the commission's ' latest order then been In effect. It is thin latest action which tho power company is fighting Vhen It Tiled the motion thai the commission i dismiss the proceedings. It Is the I claim of the power company that the proper place to determine such a mat-I mat-I te r la in the COUTtS and not before the (commission, and that the public utilities utili-ties law, as Interpreted bv tho rall-iroad. rall-iroad. would be giving an executive or legislative body Judicial functions In Violation Of tho constitution, and also I that it would confiscate the power Company's property Wthout due process pro-cess of law. nn |