The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-10-30
Tho Telegraph-Necessity OF Government
Control.


of government. No amount of outside pres
sure of influence on the part of interested Con
gressmen and the lobby, or of a powerful
monopoly, can prevent the government
assuming control OF the telegraph. It is
possible this may be delayed for time by
the agencies we refer to, for any one acquainted
with the power Of wealth and schemes Of the
lobby over Washington legislation can under
stand how difficulties are raised even to the
best measures. Indeed, we have seen already
in the initiatory proceedings on this pro
ject a most formidable opposition raised
by interested monopolies. But all this must
give way before the necessity Of the measure,
the progress Of the age and public opinion.
We hope and think Congress will take up this
subject during its next session, and then,
should comprehensive and practical plan be
developed, there is reason to expect this great
reform will be carried out at an early period.
All the governments of the civilized world
are coming to this. Most Of them have now
some control over the telegraph system, and
some have taken entire possession Of it. In
two of the freest, most enlightened and pro
gressive nations of Europe-England and Bel
gium-the governments have taken absolute
CONTROL so that it cannot be said such policy
is adapted only to countries under more cen
tralized or despotic government as those of
France or Russia. The argument sometimes
used with view to show that in free country
like ours there would be danger in giving 80
much power to the central government, and
that we should leave all such business to
private enterprise or in the hands Of private
corporations, has no foundation when
applied to the telegraph. Nor is it either
practicable or desirable to prevent centralza-
ton in matters Invested of all local bearing,
and which involve the interests of every man,
woman and child in the community. Does
government, lead to despotism or undue cen
tralization? Who but crazy theorist would
think of placing the postal service in the hands
of private individuals or of private mono
poly? Every one must know that this would
be great Inconvenience to the public, would
leave the vast network of social and business
communications in the power of private indi
viduals, and would divest the government Of
one of its most necessary and useful functions.
Everybody knows, too, by experience that
the management of the Post Ofi,e by the
government is not incompatible with republi-
can liberty, or that it gives too much power to
the government. In short, it would be absurd
to talk Of allowing private individuals or cor
porations to control the postal service. The
same reasoning applies to the telegraph While
telegraphing was limited in operations and COM
paratively an undeveloped experiment, it was
well enough to leave it to private enterprise;
but now that it has come into universal use it
is as much a matter for government super
vision or control as the Post Office. Indeed,
the time is near when the telegraph will be as
generally used and more necessary than the
supersede the use of the Post Office. Every
argument that can be made in favor Of govern
mental control over the postal system applies
with equal or greater force to the telegraph.
1t is absurd to suppose this mighty asons Of
,n.A-"a"-~e, r.~s.sos and modern civilization
should remain in the hands Of individuals or
private corporations. We might as well think
Of putting the army, navy, diplomatic service
or the legislation of the country into such
hands. The people universally are as much
and as directly interested in the proper and
cheap management of the telegraph as of the
Post Office or any other branch Of the public
service. Nothing of such general character,
in which, as was said, every man, woman and
child are directly interested, should be left
to the control Of individuals or a private
monopoly.
There being no longer any question as to the
duty of the government to take the telegraph
system under Its management, or the necessity
of 1t for the public welfare, the only thing to
consider is how that is to be done. Shall the
government establish new system and new
telegraph lines Of its own, or shall it buy ND
and reorganize the lines now in existence?
In answering this question the public interest
or welfare is the first consideration. IF the
present system and lines are as good as any
other there is no reason why the government
should not buy them at a fair price. If not,
and there are any new improvements or
inventions that can be used, then the govern
ment should establish system in accordance
with these. We say this because there Is an
invention-an automatic process Of operating
which, il is said, is great improvement and
will greatly multiply the facilities of telegraph
ing. Congress should make an appropriation
TO test this at once.
But in case the old lines should be pur-
chased only the actual cost should be taken in
estimating the value. 1t would be absurd and
a fraud upon the people to pay for the inflated
stock of the present companies, which has
been watered over and over again. While
regard should be had to legitimate private
interests that might be affected by the govern