upr000283 187

N There is no dispute that a certain loss through these causes is unavoidable, no matter how ness is conducted; Cf. Consolidated Gcaasr eCfou.l lyv. thNee wtbounsi­e( rDg.aC.s)t 2(6D7. C.F). 72 31F,. 2(424d|) B62r$o,o kl6y5n2', Un67i1o.n GaTsh eC-oc.o mpv.a nyP,rend.- * tbhaes inagv eriatgs e clloasism upon its proved experience, reported a s ' 9 % per annum. The Commission fixed tpheen seasl lboywa n$c3e> $0a0t a7 %y} eatrh.e reIbny mraekdiuncgi ntgh itsh e reodpuecrtaitoinn,g ietx­tdeindt nostt atdeedn yb yth atth e thceo mplaonsys. hadT heb eepnr essuumfpfterieodn too ft hceo rreexc­t­ness that gives aid in controversies of this order to the books of public service corporations (Consolidated Gas Co. v. Newton, supra (D.C.) 267 F'242; Newton v.' Consolidated Gas Co; 25$ U.S. I6 5 , 176, 66 L. ed. 53$, w54h$a,t 4a2m ouS.n tsC t.t o 2a6 4f),i nwdaisn g coofn firremguelda riint yt.h is Acicnestpatnicneg btyhe mloorses atsh apnr o7v%e du,p onth e thceo mgmriosusnido n thraetf usweidt h top roaplelro wc aitr e foorf the system the loss would have been less. A public uwtaistleiftuyl willolss ensot abmeo ngp eritmsi ttoepde rtaot inign clcuhdaer gense.g ligTehnet waosrt e or negligence, hoxvever; must be established by evidence <4 of one kind or another, either direct or circumstantial. . In all the pages of this record, there is neither a word nor a circumstance to charge the management with fault. ;4: Cf. Ohio Utilities ' Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, T2h6e7r eU . isS. no3t5 9,e ve3n63 ,t he6 9 sLh.a deodw. of6 5a6 , wa6r59n,i ng45 toS. thCet . co25m9p.a ny that fault was imputed and that it must give evidence osfu chc araen. issWuiet hoiunt thaen ytchasien,g ttohe sugcgoemsmti ssthiaotn tshterruec kw aosf f 26%. i Tihti s miwgahst wwhiotlhl ya sa rmbuictrha rrye.a sonO hhiaov eU tisltirtuiceks ofCfo . 4 v.or Public Utilities Commission, suDra,” In the case of Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. City of San Antonio, 75 Fed. (2d) $$0 in a case involving the law­fulness of a schedule of telephone rates which had been imposed upon the Telephone Company and which it contended were confisca­tory, the Court said at page $£2: !*There is in litigation like this a presumption ocfo rdgso odr efqauiitrhe d atnod bceo rkreepctt nebsys a aptutbelnidci ngs etrhvei cebasic re­corporation.!! -33-