The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1889-08-10
JOHN OF THE CLOTH.
DR.. Green Writes Him Another
Quiet Letter,
IN WHICH HE TURNS HIM oNA SPIT,
MetaphoricaIIy Speaking Wanamaker Gov
eminent Telegraph Rates are Shown
to be Absolutely Low.


'<Hon. John Wanamaker, Postmaster-Gen
eral;
''Dear Sir-Aclknowledging the receipt
of your letter of August 2, l beg to say
that much regret that the publication of
my letters to you to which you refer was
rnndered necessary by the extraordinary
statements 'on information furnished this
your department. contained in your let
Ter of July 10, and extensively printed in
the newspapers on the following day. You
again refer to the privileges and benefits
derived by this company through the acts
of Congress, and especially the act Of 1866
You say that under these grants the com
Dany has claimed the right to use without
compensation of any kind as to the right of
way all the highways of the country on the
ground of their being post roads; that it
has broadened this claim to the extent that
the streets of cities and towns are also
, post roads, and therefore open and
free to its occupancy and that the courts
have sustained it in this claim. Either you
or we are very badly informed by our re
Spectiye legal advisers as to what has been
claimed by the telegraph company and held
by courts in respect to the scope and au-
thOrity of that grant
II have had occasion from time to time
10 go through the post roads in a great
many cases, but l do not recall any in
stances in which such claim has been made
and sustained by the courts. What we un-
derstand the government did give US in the
act of 1886 was franchise and right TO do
telegraph business in all the states, and
this franchise was given alike to all tele
graph companies or other parties who
might accept it; and subsequently by what
was known as the Butler amendment it was
especially extended to all railroad com
panies. But the act never assumed to
give US, and could not give us,
the right to plant our poles on
any but lands actually belonging
10 the government, and that right we have
rarely exercised, except where the govern
ment wanted US to extend lines for the con-
Fenience of the government into its navy
Yards and military posts and stations, or to
its department quarters in the city of
Washington.
Had you carefully read the decision in
the Pensacola telegraph case to which you
refer, you would not have fallen into such
a grieVOus error upon this point. Chief
Justice Waite in the body of the opinion
thus defines the scope of the act of 1866
under consideration: There is no question
as to the authority of Congress to provide
for the appropriation of private property
10 the uses of the telegraph, for no such an
attempt has been made. The use of the pub
property is required, it must, so far as the
present legislation is concerned, be OBJ
Jained with private arrangement with its
owner. No compulsory proceedings are
authorized. Sovereignty under the consti-
tuition it not interfer9d with; only national
privileges are granted
1.-The decision in this case therefore was
that the state of Florida could not prohibit
the Western Union Telegraph company
from erecting and operating it's lines of
telegraph in that state after it had
acquired a right of way for its plant from
railroad company of that state, but did not
hold that it was exempt from the obliga-
ton to buy or condemn, Interstate
Statute), the property necessary to enable |
it to build its lines. The railroads are post
roads as well as some of the highways, !
and if the government gives US the right
of way on post roads, why should we haN g
10 pay the railroads for it? We have to
contract for and obtain our rights of way
rom the parties who own them whether
railroad companies, turnpike and plank
/ road companies or individual land owners, !
and in case of streets and highways, we
have to obtain a license from the city, |
county or state authorities, or condemn
snder the authority of state laws
Il sincerely wish that your ideas of the
law that we are in fact occupying many !
thousands of miles of post roads and are
the United States under the grants of that !
act may prove sound in law, but we have
relied on that grant and are satisfied that
the courts would not sustain your views. |
Our occupancy of the streets is always by |
license of the local authorities or of the |
state, and in the case of the Elevated Rail |
road company in the city of New York to |
which you refer, we pay the companies who |
own the structure for the right to string |
our wires thereon.
''rhe act to which you refer gives the !
telegraph companies accepting it the right |
10 take stone and timber from the public /
ands, and to preempt and enter not ex-
.ceeding forty acres for each station We
have never needed to use any stone, and
since the passage of that act the railroads
have afforded ample facilities for transport
ing cedar for poles, which is more durable
and economical than the native timber than
might possibly be found accessible on I'M
occupied government lands.
AS to preempting forty acres of land for
a station, we have found that wherever a
telegraph station was needed there were |
no unoccupied government lands, and if we
were to establish station on any forty
acres of unoccupied government lands, it
would be in a locality that would weld no I
revenue. 1t is true therefore that we have
never taken a stone or stick of timber. or
appropriated foot OF public land under
that law.
'sThe franchise granted this company in
common with other parties was not sup
posed to be solely for our benefit but to
secure convenient facilities to the public.
The effect of establishing our right to do
business in Pensacola was to wipe out a
charge of 81 for ten word message for a
distance of fortV-fiveumiles over a line that
claimed the exclusive franchise under the
state law, and the establishment of a
branch Office in the navy yard at that port,
which to this day we are operating for the
benefit of government at loss The bust
ness of that Office is not being sufficient to
pay the salary of the operator.
fs2-We seem to be getting nearer together
az to the power and duty of the postmaster
general to name the rate of tolls to be paid
on government messages l only claim
that this power and duty are limited by the !
to a just compensation for the [
service required, and that just compen- {
sation must cover the actual cost of ser
vice with something added for the use of
the facilities necessary to perform it; and
as YOU say, the government is willing to
paw lust rates We have come quite near {
to an agreement on the principle that must :
govern the fixing of rates to be paid
81 still insist that the government is
our most favored customer, and that the
rate for government services during the !
past five years, considering the char
Bcter of the service, is lower than
That given to any other patron. The
rate has been one cent per
word for a thousand miles or less. You
may make up a supposed message with ad-
1ress and signature of unusual length
and twenty words in the body sent,a short
distance under our half-rate contract with
sertain transportation companies. and I