OCR Text |
Show MUST FURNISH TELEPHONES. Telephone Companies are Common Carriers and Cannot Refuse Service. A few days ago it was reported that Judge Parrett, of the State Circuit Court here, had given several informal opinions adverse to the local Bell Telephone company com-pany in a case wherein the Vickery Bros., merchants sought to compel the telephone tele-phone company to furnish them the use of two telephone upon the firm's complying comply-ing with the usual terms and regulations. There has been a long standing disagreement disagree-ment between the parties. The case has since been under argument and advisement advise-ment and the court lias given its decision in the premises. . It is held that the telephone company is bound by Btatute to furnish telephone service to all applicants who comply with I the terms and regulations, being a common com-mon carrier of news and intelligence, as well as a public corporation. While patents and new inventions may be rightfully right-fully and sacredly . protected, yet when : voluntarily placed in channels of general j commerce, they must be so used as not j to give partiality or discrimination in favor I of or against any persons, or class of persons. per-sons. In this case no previous quarrel or wrong would relieve either party under this decision. The telephone company will have to pay,unless relieved by the supreme court, $100 penalty for each refusal to furnish telephone service to plaintiffs. The latter have nearly a dozen applications for two telephones and upon refusal have sued for ; penalties, amounting to $200 in each case; incidenially,although not strictly involved , in the case. ' ' ' ' Judge Parrett gives hi3 opinion that another State statute limiting the charge for the use of telephones to $3 for single telephones and $5 for two, is constitutional, constitu-tional, and that the word telephone includes in-cludes all the appliances necessary to communicate between different points according to the usage of the system. Evansville Ind.) Dispatch. . |