C. L. 148]

CERTIFICATE.

A hearing and investigation of the matters and things involved in this proceeding having been had, and said Division having, on the date hereof, made and filed a report containing its findings of fact and conclusions thereon, which said report is hereby referred to and made a part hereof,

It is hereby certified, That the acquisition by the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company of control of the Kansas City Telephone Company by the purchase of capital stock of that company, as described in the application and report aforesaid, will be of advantage to the persons to whom service is to be rendered and in the public interest. March 15, 1924.

ALABAMA.

Public Service Commission.

In re PETITION OF THE SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY FOR AUTHORITY TO SELL CERTAIN TELEPHONE PROPERTY.

Docket No. 4464.

Decided February 6, 1924.

Sale and Purchase of Property Approved.

REPORT.

This matter came before the Commission in the form of a petition filed by the Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company for a certificate authorizing the sale and transfer of all of petitioner's local telephone exchange plant at Falkville, Alabama, excepting its central office equipment, transmitters, receivers and induction coils, to the Farmers Rural Telephone Company.

The Commission has had its engineering department make an investigation in this case, and thereafter held a public hearing in the town of Falkville on January 24, 1924. Upon the record in this case, together with the report of the Commission's engineer, the Commission finds:

That the petitioner has lost many of its subscribers to the Rural company, the latter having gained in its two years' existence 107 subscribers, while the petitioner has only 26;

That the petitioner is not now earning its cost of operation, plus a fair return on the value of its property;

That in a town the size of Falkville with 362 inhabitants, the total telephone revenue is not sufficient to support two companies and will eventually result in a depreciation of service of both.

In order to secure services of the two companies, the business houses require two telephones, one connecting to each company.

. L. 148]

The record contains testimony by the officials and operators of the Farmers Rural Telephone Company to the effect that the said company possesses equipment and organization sufficient to enable it to render efficient, adequate and continuous service to the public in the town of Falkville and to the territory adjacent to said town. The Farmers Rural Telephone Company will be required to comply fully with all requirements of the law, including filing of schedule of rates, fares, charges and service regulations, and will also require the said Farmers Rural Telephone Company to furnish reasonable and adequate service and facilities in conformity with the provisions of Section 8 of the Alabama Transportation Act of 1920.

That the public interest will best be served by the sale of the petitioner's telephone business and property to the Farmers Rural Telephone Company, thereby consolidating the two telephone systems.

ORDER.

It is, therefore, ordered by the Commission, That the prayer of said petitioner be, and it is in all things, granted, and the Commission by the issuance of this certificate does grant and confer upon petitioner, the Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company, its successors and assigns, all the rights, powers and authority which, under the laws of the State of Alabama, it is authorized to confer for the purpose of enabling petitioner to sell said telephone property in Falkville, Alabama, to the said Farmers Rural Telephone Company.

It is further ordered, That a copy of this instrument be spread upon the records of the Commission and that the original, under the seal of this Commission, be furnished to petitioner as a certificate authorizing the sale of its properties at Falkville, Alabama, as authorized and required under Section 10 of the Alabama Transportation Act of 1920.

This the sixth day of February, 1924.

ARIZONA.

Corporation Commission.

In re INVESTIGATION BY THE COMMISSION ON ITS OWN INITIATIVE OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE MOUNTAIN STATES TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY TO DETERMINE THE PRACTICABILITY OF REQUIRING "NO TOLL" SERVICE.

Docket No. 1645-E-177 - Decision No. 1790.

Decided February 27, 1924.

Held to be the Duty of Subscriber to Protect His Telephone from Improper Use - Held that Subscriber Should Install Coin Box or Booth Where Unable to Properly Protect Telephone from Long Distance Calls - Held to be Neither Feasible nor Practical to Require Telephone Company to Establish "No Toll" Service

The investigation herein was instituted by the Commission on its own motion, at the instance of a number of the board of trustees of the Odd Fellows Lodge at Phoenix and of two business firms. The complainants stated that they had requested the telephone company to refrain from accepting toll calls at their respective places of business, but that the company had declined to conform to these requests. The matter was handled informally for a number of weeks, and on April 6 was docketed for formal proceedings. Following due notice to all interested parties, the case came on for hearing at the office of the Commission at 10 o'clock A. M., May 16, 1923.

Although the hearing had been deferred on two different occasions for the purpose of enabling the trustees of the Odd Fellows Lodge to be present, there were no appearances except on behalf of the respondent.

C. L. 148]

The testimony disclosed the fact that there is a very slight demand for this class of service and that to establish it would necessitate a complete check of the more than 8,200 telephones in the Phoenix exchange, whenever long distance calls are placed. To accomplish this would necessitate additional employees and would inevitably result in a slowing down of the service to all subscribers. The extra expense thus involved would have to be laid upon the other subscribers and the impairment of the service would be felt by all.

In the proceedings before this Commission in Docket No. 483,* decided March 2, 1918, P. U. R. 1918-D, 84, in which we reviewed the rates, rules and regulations of this company, we had before us Rule No. 8, which reads as follows:

"The subscriber shall pay monthly at schedule charges for all toll messages, and shall be responsible for all charges for messages originating at the station or stations for which he has contracted."

We found at that time that the above quoted rule was just and reasonable and that it was necessary to the proper conduct of the telephone business. This conclusion we reiterate.

When a subscriber contracts for a telephone he accepts the obligation to protect it from improper use and the faithful performance of his contract is essential in order to afford prompt and adequate service at just and reasonable rates. It is as much the duty of the subscriber as it is of the telephone company to carry out the terms of the contract.

Ordinarily, telephones are placed in an office where either the owner of the business or his manager or employees are able to exercise proper supervision. If for the purpose of attracting customers or renters, as would be the case with lodge rooms, protection cannot be afforded, then the subscriber must either assume the responsibility for the calls which are placed, or protect himself by the estab

See Commission Leaflet No. 77, p. 911.