Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1889-08-06


and in one association the rate IL even
lower than that. | do not criticise the
press rate. IL h not too low. IL would 10
better. ia nv Judgment. for the pubic
press. and telegraph companies II u Nero
still lower a. % the associated press. lhere
Is force in vOur statement that 10 - "hoIe-
sale rate. az u y re-, for the same dispatoh
sent over tho same wire, at the same tinle
90 several customers, but Is II not true thHt
the rates given 20 some portions OF the
l,ress cHcetivrly contradict your owns tate-
mont that for messages transmitted 10
20 single address the Government Is our oniy
criOving thereduced rates by
this urcaure Won mean that the Govern
ru-ut has thc lowest rate given 20 any
~igeie customer. IT'S lowest rate being ono
cont "a word for day and three quarters
If 70 cer for night mr-1ige. but TINS
chartp Is made not oulv upon the message
itsrlf. but upou boz address aud signatUfeAs
wei. 80 flat f0s ten words ~ message
and ten words in the address and Signature
t,c above rate Is 10 fact two cents per word
ia the dav and one and a half cents per
word at night. Is it not true that the
lartr uauers Of New York, Chicago, ana
other large cities have a half-cent rate Tor
tro'r special dispatches ~ the day ana
oulrt.r Of % cent st night, or rate ono
half lower than the Government has beeh
rrautcd2 - IL not true, also, that TINS
patronage from the enterprising press IS
fhc most profitable that you have, and that
. would De fact give you SIN more pronI
e made still lower Reduced rates bring
an increased business and enlarged pr0tt.
Your own testimony before the com
rltfcrs of Congress At various times has
been steadily 10 the effect that every time
Your company has reduced prices 1t has
gained an increased income. Ihis accoriS
with ms own view. that q constantly-de-
rrcaeirg rate where there are large num-
bers Of customer. VIII both better the pub
JIG aud better the profit 10 any business
believe that the new rateproposed Tor t1e
Government business would not materially
alter the amount Of cash received by You;
while the Government would De euablth
10 greatly quicken md vllallze the trausAc-
tion OF It's business ia all departments. ~
is quite true. as you say. that the GoVeth-
meut D. able 10 pay proper rates ana l
may add that sp far as | know II Is wiling
to nav lust rates. and that 1t Is tarthest
from my thought that the people shouid
suffer bv reason Of the losses YOU clam
ftat YOU are now making and would sun
further make on the Government business;
avn satisfied the people could and should
have much lower rates than now exist. anu
eltherthe people nor the Government
should suffer because specially low rates
aye given tp favored customers.
While rlaimirg that The Government has
received the lowest single address rate, you
not only admit lower rate Co the press.
but also plalnly say that certain railroads
or Transportation companies are gwen
"half commercial rates When 70 IS con-
4,d.red that IN Government messages al
the words are cOu0ted. address and sigma
turc a- vel as message. aud in all other
teiDer,us the message only j. counted. -
IL not true that this half rate 10 such COM
pauips i- at least ~ low as the Government
rate aud in some instances lower. FOR
instance. Government message rom
Washington to New York, containing
twenty words in the message and ten
IN tie address and signature. would be
CHARGED 20 thirty cents, winch ~ near
lv 10 Der cent. more than the transport
tati1n companies would pay for the same
measure. / am not speaking now ana a.
mot wish 10 have confused with this part
of Cine discussion the free service You give
% railroads for certain service TO you.
These payments ! UNDERSTAND 10 be Tor
rights Of way. Sc. More than that. l am
informed your company ia many -a~,s
actually paws lArge sums of money to rail-
roads for rights oi way aud IT doss hvt
sc,.ri unreasonable 10 suppose that It
would not re out of place for telegraph
companies To be expected 10 make COM
pcu-ation of some kind 10 the Government
Tor its much larger concessions, which. IN
effect. nnFe secured 10 Won the enjoyment,
pnrt.cuMrlV iu cities aud towns, OF much
more valuable rights of WAY.
Fourth. A 10 your statement that no
message can be- carried and delivered 10y a
telegraph company for less than twenty
cents without the service being done ~ q
u. .NUr.r cory 20 an
pcars To- ba % very difficult thing to ascer-
lam definitely Perhaps in establishing a
proper rate for the Government TO pay tins
subject may best bc referred 10 cplnmls-
sion 10 ascertain the facts. iu one OF your
letters YOU put the average cost ~ mes
SAGE To hc company in receiving, carrying,
and delivering al ~ . 10 cents. in TINS cost
do Won NOT include the large sums paid for
rentals of leased lines, some OF wblch
are not now in use but only valuable
TO YOU iu removing competition, the
rights of way on railroads, and On
other accounts, which are obviously
chnrecablc 10 the capital account and not
10 operating expenses: Is 10 not true that
within "A few wears and for several years IN
succession large volumes of business have
been handled by Your company and other
companies at the minimum rate OF ten
cent. "a message. and did not tins rate con-
tinun until the Western Union absorbed
tine competing lines? The table OF sta
tlstics given no Your memorial 10 the Sen
ATE committee in 1855 shows that during
tbc period of q tcn-ccnt rate your COM
rauy did not loose money. but made large
ur.6ts. Ifthis was possible then. and -
nrclaiiv az your business has grown very
i1rrrlv IN volume since, II would seem That
Do MIGHT be practicable now. understand
that the signal service reports make mp a
very LARGE proportiOn of the eutlre amount
of the Government telegraphic bust
moss. Your schedule shows that for
eleven wears the Government has
been paying about three cents per
word iOr each circuit on which
Govcrnment messages are transmitted. No
reduction whatever has been made IN that
rate since 1877. but within that period YOU
have reduced the public rate from sixty
two and one half cents 10 thirty cents per
message, more than % per cent. reduction,
and the cost Of handling kilograms has
been reduced during the same period from
forty-thrce and four tcuths cents 70 twenty
three and two tcnths cents per message, or
over 4G per cent. reduction. Within the past
five years the public rate has fallen u per
cent. and the cost OF transmission about
X ner cent. but within that period there has
been no reduction whatever III Govern
ment rates. Taking all these facts into
account. | believe that the Government
has been paving for its telegraphlc service
more than any other customer giving you
a ike or approximate amount OF business,
and that within the period first named
there has not been so great reduction IN
Government rates as 10 the general public
and press. Waving entirely the question
of BENEFITS accruing 10 the telegraphlc
companies under the act of 1866, the Gov
ereInent ought 10 be put upon az faVOraDle
a basis a. 10 telegraphic rates IS your most
favored customers.
Iuasmuch "a this discussion has taken a
wider range than / anticipated, 1t may be
proper 10 add. referring 10 your letter, that
YOU are right in saying that the acceptance,
bv the telegraph companies OF the act OF
1866 rendered il 70 all intents and pur-
poses a compact between the Government
and telegraph companies" But L 10 not
agree with all of your next succeeding
statements. For instance, a printed copy OF
your memorial presented TO the Senate
Post-Ofiice Committee last year misquotes
the act OF 1866. which should read " Pro-
yided. however. that the United States
may at any time purchase all the telegraph
lines. property, and effects Of any or AL
the companies acting under the pro-
visions OF the act of July "a. 1866.
The words ANY" and - or" are omit
ted in vour memorial. This omission WAS
of course an error. but as your present cor.
....,,..,,, Toroa .,yr,rpSsee the same meaning,