upr000319 8

was no intention to dedicate suoh supply to a public use, would not constitute the doing of such business as a public utility so as to subject that activity to the Jurisdiction road Commission* of our Rail­You will appreciate, however, that in the event Mr. Wright invests a considerable sura, as your file suggests he might, and in doing so, depends upon the Railroad Company for his water supply, in the event we should at some later date deny him access to such supply, I am not prepared to state that our Railroad Commission would not determine that our ar­rangement with Mr. Wright constituted a public utility business. As a matter of fact, I believe the Commission would consider the equities in the case and would probably hold that we were a Mpru.b liWcri guhtti.lity and consequently, obliged to continue service to As I have above indicated, under the present state of the law, I believe that suoh an order could be annulled by proceedings in our courts but Inasmuch as such proceedings, if made necessary by circumstances, would be instituted prob-bly some years hence, I can give no guarantee that the outcome would be favorable to the Railroad Company. I indulge in suoh equivo­cation because Mr. Lynch Inquires as to the "possibility* of such a result. E, Bennett wjg/ots