The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-12-28

l
The press and the telegraph are natural
allies and indispensable one to the other.
Without the press the great benefit Of the
telegraph would be lost to the masses; with
out the telegraph the usefulness and interest
of the press in the present day would be
materially diminished. Each occupies an in
dependent position of its own, entirely dis
tinct from the other. The legitimate province
of the press is TO collect, comment upon and
publish to the world the news Of the hour;
the legitimate business Of the telegraph is to
transmit the news from point to point over
the wires with lightning speed. Neither can
step out of its own sphere and interfere with
the functions of the other without damage to
both and detriment to the interests Of the
| people. 1t would be absurd for the press to
attempt to regulate the manner in which the
telegraph should conduct its business Of trans
mission, and it would be great public evil
If the telegraph should ever be permitted to
graphic wires or in any manner 10 interfere
with the independent position of the press.
| We have never yet known an instance in which
the newspapers of this or any other country'
have overstepped their legitimate boundary to
interfere improperly with the telegraph COM
panies, while experience shows that the tele-
graph companies are prone to assert and not
unfrequently endeavor to exercise an undue
authority and power over the public journals.
This has been especially the case in our own
country, where the telegraph business has,
| unfortunately, become monster monopoly in
the hands of few individuals responsible to
no authority, and where the press has been,
consequently, in a great measure dependent
upon single line for the transmission Of news.
The HERALD has endeavored to warn the
newspaper press of the United States against
this threatened danger. We have no quarrel
with any telegraph company or its managers
or directors; but we have encouraged the
construction of competing lines in the
| past, as we now advocate the absorp-
ton of the telegraph by the government,
because we believe that the public interests
demand low rates, greater facilities and
uniform tariff, for the press as well as for
individuals who use the wires, and we can see
at present no better method Of securing these
needed reforms.
In England the telegraph business was free
from many of the abuses which prevail in the
United States. Competing lines reached
every part Of the country, and the laws not
only encouraged the construction Of opposition
lines, but positively prohibited the federation
of those running on parallel routes. The
press rates were unusually low, the average
cost of four thousand words daily being but
about one thousand dollars year, while q
special wire, used exclusively by newspaper
for eight hours every night, cost only about
three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars
year. or less than one-fifth of the cost of the
HERALDs specials from q single point. Yet
the press Of Great Britain urged the assump-
ton of the telegraph by the government, and
in the evidence given by the proprietors Of the
leading journals Of the country before the
select committee of Parliament we ascertain
their main incentive to have been the attempted
encroachments Of these private corporations
upon the province and the independence of the
press One witness testified that the sy stem
forced upon the press by the telegraph, by
which the latter collected as well as trans
mitted news reports, was open to serious
objection and had worked detrimentally to the
interests Of the newspapers and their readers,
for the reason that intelligence Of real value
was frequently kept back, while news that was
immaterial and uninteresting was furnished
for publication. Another objected to the
hooo hoA Sty,lo oI In <hnh on Cr
telegraph companies q power which they had
used in despotic and arbitrary manner"
In illustration he cited the instance of the
result Of an important sporting event, upon
which large amounts Of money depended, and
which was delayed in the telegraph Office long
after he knew of his own knowledge that the
information was in the hands of the operator.
The following extract from the testimony Of
this witness, Francis d. Finlay, the proprietor
of the Northern Wig, is particularly peril
nent to our telegraphlc experience at home -
witness-The third objection to the existing sys-
tenn IL that the action of the telegraph company is
ton the companies have acquired an absolute mo-
nopoy OF the news supplied, whereas broker who
not sa sn MIN sse ~ INC Uo
London by the Electric Telegraph Company. The
newspaper proprietors can make no selection. |
have my contract with the Magnetic Telegraph
Company. am not and have not been satisfied
with that company but cannot be supplied by any
other telegraph company. In consequence Of the
combination there is no competition In the trans
mission OF news.
Question-Can you give any instance OF the exer-
else OF that despotic action the part OF the
panys
Witness-I can on the sth OF June l wrote an
article in the Northern Whtg, in which supported
the bill at present before the committee. spoke OF
the advantages OF IL to the public and to the press
and made very severe complaint Of the manner
In which the press had been dealt WITH winding up
by saying that we (speaKing In the name OF the
paper did not attempt to conceal personal de-
sire that we should be relieved from the pressure
which had submitted to for so long On the 18th
OF June Mr. Boys, the superintendent OF the inteli-
gence department, wrote to me letter.
Question-Have You that letter.
Wness--I have copy or IL.