U.S. Supreme Court AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO. v. U S, 299 U.S. 232 (1936)

[Page 299 U.S. 232, 247]

223, 34 S.Ct. 853; United States v. Cohen Grocery Co., 255 U.S. 81, 92, 41 S.Ct. 298, 301, 14 A.L.R. 1045; United States v. Wurzbach, 280 U.S. 396, 399, 50 S.Ct. 167, 168; People v. Mancuso, 255 N.Y. 463, 470, 175 N.E. 177, 76 A.L.R. 514. 'Moreover ... since the statutes require a specific intent to defraud in order to encounter their prohibitions, the hazard of prosecution which appellants fear loses whatever substantial foundation it might have in the absence of such a requirement.' Hygrade Provision Co. v. Sherman, supra.

Third: The Classification of Plant as Used in Present Service or Held for Use Thereafter.

Property 'used in telephone service at the date of the balance-sheet' goes into account 100.1; property 'held for imminent use in telephone service' under a definite plan for such use goes into account 100.3; and other property held for future use not imminent or definite goes into still another account, 103, which covers 'miscellaneous physical property.'

The companies object that this classification is so vague as to be arbitrary. We do not look at it that way. Property held for imminent use in telephone service and under a definite plan will include spare plants kept in reserve as a measure of prudent administration. Such uses had consideration by this court in a recent opinion. Columbus Gas & Fuel Co. v. Public Utilities Comm. of Ohio, , 52 S.Ct. 763, 91 A.L.R. 1403. Property held in present telephone use comes very near to defining itself. If particular situations shall develop ambiguity or doubt, the Commission will be available for clarifying instructions.

Fourth: The evidence does not show that the expense of revising the accounts will lay so heavy a burden upon the companies as to overpass the bounds of reason.

The decree should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

AFFIRMED.

Mr. Justice STONE took no part in the determination or decision of this case.