scribers can, after said physical connection is made, receive connections as desired with the long distance lines of the Bell System; that all of said subscribers have expressed themselves as agreeable to the discontinuance of their service when said physical connection is made.

"Wherefore, petitioner prays that the Commission enter an order authorizing it to discontinue said local subscribers at Logansport, Indiana, and to discontinue the giving of local telephone exchange service from said Logansport exchange."

After due notice, the matter was heard in the rooms of the Commission at Indianapolis on March 14, 1924.

The evidence disclosed that petitioner operates a toll switchboard at Logansport, and in connection therewith gives local service to 25 business and 5 residence subscribers; that these subscribers take petitioner's service in order that they may have outside long distance conneetion; that also in the city of Logansport, the Logansport Home Telephone Company, an independent company, operates a telephone exchange and system in the city of Logansport, and vicinity, in competition with the Indiana Bell Telephone Company; that on March 1, 1924, a contract was entered into between petitioner, Indiana Bell Telephone Company, and the Logansport Home Telephone Company, whereby the long distance switchboard of petitioner at Logansport would be connected by a trunking system with the switchboard of the Logansport Home Telephone Company, thereby giving to all the subscribers of the Logansport Home Telephone Company long distance service upon all lines of the Bell company; that after said physical connection is made, there will no longer be any necessity for the continuance by petitioner of its local service in the city of Logansport; that practically all of the subscribers of the Indiana Bell at Logansport are subscribers to the Logansport Home Telephone Company system and that after such trunking has been accomplished, they will no longer continue as subscribers of the Indiana Bell System.

The evidence further discloses that all of said subscribers have expressed themselves as agreeable to the discontinuing of their service after said physical connection has been made.

C. L. 149]

A copy of the traffic agreement between the Logansport Home Telephone Company and the Indiana Bell Telephone Company as it relates to the matter as set forth in the petition has been fixed with the Commission and marked Exhibit A.

The Commission is, therefore, of the opinion, and finds, that petitioner's prayer should be granted, authorizing it to discontinue the giving of local telephone exchange service at Logansport, Indiana.

It is, therefore, ordered by the Public Service Commission of Indiana, That the Indiana Bell Telephone Company be, and it is hereby, authorized to discontinue local telephone exchange service from its Logansport exchange. March 28, 1924.

In re PETITION OF THE OTTERBEIN TELEPHONE COMPANY (GEORGE S. AKERS et al., OWNERS) AND ROBERT H. BOLT et al. FOR AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER COMMON STOCK AND TO ISSUE NOTES.

No. 7532.

Decided March 28, 1924.

Petition to Sell Stock Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction — Issue of Notes Authorized.

OPINION AND ORDER.

On March 9, 1924, the following joint petition was filed with the Commission:

"Your petitioners, George S. Akers, Mary A. Akers and John W. Fielding, owners of all the common stock of the Otterbein Telephone Company, wou'd respectfully represent and show that it is a corporation and that its principal office and place of business is located in the town of Otterbein, Benton County, State of Indiana; that it is a public utility as defined by the law of the State of Indiana and that it is engaged in affording telephone service to the public; that it has and maintains an exchange and other apparatus in the said town of Otterbein, with telephone lines radiating therefrom, throughout the said town and to adjacent country districts in said county.

"Your petitioners respectfully ask for authorization of the sale of the

common stock of the Otterbein Telephone Company by its present owners, to Robert H. Bolt, Katherine S. Bolt, Margaret L. Bolt and Wade S. Bolt, for the sum of $38,000; $18,000 in cash and 10 promissory notes of $2,000 each, bearing 6 per cent. interest per annum; one $2,000 note to become due every six months until all are paid, the last note running until the third day of March, 1929.

"Wherefore, petitioners respectfully pray that your Honorable Commission permit them to make such transfer and to issue $20,000 of notes."

After due notice, a hearing was held at the offices of the Commission on March 24, 1924.

The evidence shows that the Otterbein Telephone Company is a corporation organized under the laws of Indiana, with a common capital stock of $10,000; and that the condition of the company is approximately 80 per cent.

The evidence further shows that there are 622 subscribers of the Otterbein Telephone Company, paying the following rates and charges:

Bus ness telephones

Residence telephones

Rural telephones

Net Per Month

$1 75

150

125

The evidence further shows that in 1917 the present owners paid on a basis of $57.00 per station, there being approximately 500 stations.

Section 95 of the Public Utility Laws of Indiana, provides as follows:

"No public utility as defined in Section 1 of this Act shall transfer or lease its franchise, works or system or any part of such franchise, works or system to any other person, or corporation or contract for the operation of its works or system, without the written consent of the Commission after a hearing. The permission and approval of the Commission to the assignment, transfer or lease of a franchise under this section shall not be construed to revive or validate any lapsed or invalid franchise or to enlarge or add to the powers and privileges contained in the grant of any franchise or to waive any forfeiture. No such corporation shall directly or indirectly acquire the stock or bonds of any other corporation incorporated for or engaged in the same or a similar business, or purporting to operate or operating under a franchise from the same or any other municipality unless authorized so to do by the Commission. Save where stock shall be transferred or held for the purpose of collateral security, only with the consent of the Commission

[In

C. L. 149]

empowered by this Act to give such consent, shall a co porat on foreign or domestic operating a public utility purchase or acquire, take or hold, more than 10 per centum of the total capital stock issued by a corporation doing the same or a similar business; provided, that a corporation now lawfully holding a majority of the capital stock of any corporation operating a public utility may, without the consent of the Commission, acquire and hold the remainder of the capital stock of such corporation or any portion thereof.

66

Nothing herein contained shall be construed to prevent the holding of stock heretofore lawfully acquired or to prevent upon the surrender or exchange of said stock pursuant to a reorganization plan, the purchase, acquisition, taking or holding of a proportionate amount of stock of any new corporation organized to take over at foreclosure or other sale, the property of any corporation whose stock has been thus surrendered or exchanged. Every contract, assignment, transfer or agreement for transfer of stock, by or through any person or corporation to any corporation, in violation of any provision of this section shall be void and of no effect and no such transfer or assigment shall be made upon the books of any such corporation or be recognized effective for any purpose.

In view of the fact that the above section does not cover the sale of stock of a corporation to an individual or individuals, the Commission is without authority to order the sale and transfer of common stock as prayed by petitioners; and the only question before the Commission in this cause is whether the Otterbein Telephone Company should be authorized to issue $20,000 of notes.

The evidence shows that the property of the Otterbein Telephone Company consists of a one-story brick building located in the town of Otterbein, in which building is located the office and exchange property of the telephone company; and poles and wire in the town of Otterbein, radiating throughout the adjacent territory, all of which property is valued at approximately $40,000.

The Commission, being fully advised in the premises, is of the opinion, and finds, that the request of petitioners for authority to sell and transfer the common stock of the Otterbein Telephone Company to Robert H. Bolt, et al., as individuals, should be denied for want of jurisdiction, and it will be so ordered.

[Ind The Commission further finds that the Otterbein Telephone Company should be authorized to issue $20,000 of notes bearing 6 per cent. interest, payable annually, in sums of $2,000 each, and it will be so ordered.

It is, therefore, ordered by the Public Service Commission of Indiana, That petitioners' request for authority to sell and transfer the common stock of the Otterbein Telephone Company to Robert H. Bolt, et al., as individuals, be, and it is, denied for want of jurisdiction.

It is further ordered, That the Otterbein Telephone Company be, and it is, authorized to issue $20,000 of notes in sums of $2,000 each, bearing 6 per cent. interest, payable annually; one $2,000 note to become due six months from date and every six months thereafter until all are paid; said notes to be issued and delivered to George S. Akers, Mary A. Akers and John W. Fielding, as payment for said common stock of the Otterbein Telephone Company.

It is further ordered, That petitioner, the Otterbein Telephone Company, shall pay to the Treasurer of the State of Indiana, through the secretary of this Commission, the sum of $30.00, the fee for the issuance of such securities prescribed in Section 96 of the Public Service Commission Act.

March 28, 1924.

In re PETITION OF THE EUREKA TELEPHONE COMPANY FOR
DISCONTINUANCE OF FLAT RATE FROM CORYDON TO NEW
ALBANY.

No. 7493.

Decided April 2, 1924.

Petition to Discontinue Flat Rate Service Denied.

OPINION AND ORDER.

On February 1, 1924, the Eureka Telephone Company of Corydon, Indiana, filed with the Commission a petition, which, omitting the caption and signatures, is in the words and figures following, to wit: