phone where the line and telephone are owned and maintained by the members thereon; that in the absence of evidence to show that the cost is greater than 25 cents per month, a charge in excess of that should not be made; that where the company which does the switching owns its line extending to the line of the company for which the switching is done, the rate must be increased sufficiently to pay income on the investment and maintenance and depreciation of such line; that $1.00 per year per subscriber for the 41 subscribers now being switched by complainant should be more than sufficient to maintain complainant's line extending to defendant's line, and to pay a return on the investment therein and to set aside a sufficient amount for depreciation thereof; that connection between the two telephone companies should be maintained.

The Commission further finds that the complainant should not be required to give continuous service at all hours of the night and on Sunday. Under the decision of the Supreme Court in Twin Valley Telephone Company v. Mitchell, 27 Okla. 388, the Commission would not have authority to order continuous service. The language of the Court upon that subject is as follows:

When it is proposed to make an order to require a telephone company to keep open and operate an exchange in a town of three hundred people at every minute during every day in the week, day and night, including Sunday, evidence is admissible to show that such could not be done except at a pecuniary loss to the telephone company."

From the evidence in this case, it is found that the earnings are not sufficient to warrant the additional service demanded by the defendant.

That It is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged, the complainant, the Modern Telephone Company, shall charge and collect for switching the telephones of the defendant, the Sunny Point Telephone Company, a rate of $1.00 per quarter or $4.00 per year per telephone, and that connection with the exchange of the complainant be maintained.

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, July 15, 1915.

[Okla.

WISCONSIN.

Railroad Commission.

In re INVESTIGATION ON MOTION OF THE COMMISSION OF THE SERVICE, RULES AND PRACTICES OF THE RICHLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY.

U-460.

Decided September 17, 1915.

Investigation of Service, Rules and Practices Made.

The Commission on its own motion undertook an investigation of the service, rules and practices of the Richland Telephone Company.

Installation of Full Metallic Circuits Ordered - Compliance with Commission's Standards for Telephone Service Required - Courtesy

Held to Be Essential to Good Telephone Service. Complaint had been made that the service furnished by the Richland Telephone Company at its Richland Center exchange was inadequate, due to slow switchboard service, obsolete equipment and discourtesy on the part of employees. Tests of the service were made, and only 74 per cent. of the calls were answered within ten seconds, the time fixed in the Commission's standards for service for exchanges in cities the size of Richland Center.

Considerable annoyance was caused by cross-talk, this being due to the fact that one-third of the lines were grounded circuit. The Commission's standards for service required that lines should be so constructed and maintained as to eliminate all cross-talk and noise which unreasonably interfered with the transmission of messages for ordinary distances.

Although no complaint was made as to the present employees, past operators and employees had been discourteous to patrons.

Held: That the Richland Telephone Company should provide full metallic circuits on all of its telephone lines within the city of Richland Center, and should otherwise fully comply with the Commission's standards for telephone service;

That courtesy on the part of both employees and patrons is essential to good telephone service, and should be encouraged in every possible

way.

Discrimination in Service Eliminated— Installation of Central Energy

System Recommended.

The Richland Telephone Company was operating a magneto system at Richland Center, but certain of its subscribers had their telephones equipped with automaphones whereby they could call central by taking down the receiver and without turning the crank. No special rate was made for this automaphone service. Subscribers desired that automaphones be furnished to all or that a central energy system be installed.

The company refused to install automaphones as the switchboard was unsuited to this class of service, and also refused to install a central energy system.

Held: That while a change to a central energy system was desirable, it was not necessary for adequate service, but the company should arrange for the change to such a system as soon as its finances warranted it;

That unless the company was in a position to extend automaphone service to all its subscribers who desired such service and were willing to pay a reasonable additional rental therefor, it should not install automaphones or permit the installation of automaphones by individuals.

Rules Providing for Advance Payment and Discontinuance of Service for Non-Payment Approved.

In its directory, the company published its rules providing that rentals were payable in advance, that a collector would make an effort to see all subscribers within the city limits once per month, unless not desired by the subscriber, that bills would be mailed on the tenth of the current month, that all telephones on which the rental was not paid before the fifteenth of the month would be disconnected, and all on which rental was unpaid on the twenty-fifth would be removed. These rules applied to all telephones except party lines extending out of the city, and the only exception in this case was that such telephones were subject to removal on the twenty-fifth without notice by disconnection on the fifteenth. Held: That the rules set forth are reasonable.

Removal Charge Approved.

The company required a one-year contract, and if a telephone was moved within that period a charge of $1.00 was made. If the telephone was retained longer than one year, the subscriber might have it moved without any additional charge by signing a new contract. Complainants objected because a charge was made for moving a telephone when a telephone was already installed in both the house vacated and in the house to which the move was made.

Held: That the present charge is reasonable, for even where there is a telephone in both the house vacated and in the one moved to, wiring changes must be made that the subscriber may retain his number;

That although the work is greater in some cases than in others, it is necessary to establish a flat charge.

[Wis.

C. L. 47]

OPINION AND DECISION.

Complaint having been made that the service, rules and practices of the Richland Telephone Company are unjust and discriminatory, an investigation was undertaken by the Commission on its own motion. A hearing was held at Richland Center on November 9, 1914. Levi H. Bancroft appeared on his own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated. Burnham and Black, by O. D. Black, represented the Richland Telephone Company.

From the testimony it appears that the patrons of the Richland Telephone Company have three principal complaints, namely,

1. The service is inadequate due to slow switchboard service, obsolete equipment and discourtesy on the part of employees.

2. The service is discriminatory in that automaphone service is furnished to some patrons and refused to others. 3. The rules with reference to the payment of rentals are unreasonable.

Adequacy of Service.

The testimony shows that the switchboard service is slow, and an inspection made subsequent to the hearing confirms the fact. Forty-two test calls were made by the inspector and only 74 per cent. of these were answered within 10 seconds, the average time being 12.7 seconds. This falls considerably below the standard fixed in Rule 7 of the general rules* for telephone service issued by the Commission On August 13, 1914, 15 W. R. C. R. 1, 4, which provides that at exchanges serving 500 or more subscribers, 94 per cent. of the calls shall be answered within 10 seconds. The supervision of calls was also found to be less frequent than is usual at comparable exchanges.

About one-third of the telephone lines are grounded circuits, the remainder being full metallic lines. The magneto system is in use and the instruments are of the type common to that system. It was pointed out that under the existing

• See Commission Leaflet No. 34, p. 1127.

arrangement patrons are annoyed to a considerable extent by cross-talk. Rule 2 of the standards* for service above referred to provides that

"Equipment and lines shall be so constructed and maintained as to eliminate all cross-talk and noise which unreasonably interfere with the transmission of messages for ordinary distances."

In a city of the size of Richland Center compliance with this rule must, except in rare cases, mean the elimination of all grounded circuits. There are 18 other cities in the State having a population of from 2300 to 3150 respectively and practically all of these have full metallic lines throughout. There appears to be no peculiar situation in Richland Center which makes metallic circuits less necessary for adequate service than is the case in other cities; and the changing of the existing grounded circuits to full metallic should be undertaken at once.

It is evident from the testimony that in the past operators and other employees of the company have been somewhat discourteous to patrons. However, witnesses stated that they had no complaint to make of persons employed at the time of the hearing. Courtesy on the part of both employees and patrons is essential to good telephone service, and should be encouraged in every possible way.

Discrimination.

The president of a bank and a doctor receive the service of a patented device known as an automaphone, which makes it possible to call central by taking down the receiver without turning a crank, substituting dry cell batteries for the magneto. Another instrument of this sort is in use at the central office. A number of requests for automaphone service have been made by patrons, but all such requests have been refused. No special rate is made for this service, but in one instance the equipment was furnished and is not owned by the subscriber. Patrons desire that automa

* See Commission Leaflet No. 34, p. 1127.

[Wis.