Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1890-10-09

AS to the constitution ality of postal
telegraphy the Postmaster-General says:
'It has been argued by learned lawyers
for a score of years that Government
telegraph is unconstitutional The mo-
tives of these gentlemen have been one
of two in all cases-they have been the
paid attorneys of those corporations
whose special interests have demanded
that their monopolies should in no way
be interfered with. They have done
their business and done it we'll The
other opponents were those who imag-
ined that the Constitution would be
exposed to every sort of outrage if
they were to fall sick for
day. The courts of highest
appeal have settled this question. Con-
gress settled it in advance of judicial
action by making the United States the
owner and the Post-office Department
the manager of the first line of wire
constructed for commercial and public
uses. The old Government telegraph
schemes were constitutional. What
shall be said, then, of limited postal
telegraph, which have been somewhat
criticised for bringing forward? There
is no doubt that it is constitutional
''The Constitution permits the Gener-
al Government to transmit intelligence
for the people. The POst-oftice Depart
ment has. been doing this with the
money and the improvements at its dis
posal for 100 years 1t is preposterous
to argue that the telegraph ought not
to be utilized for the cheaper, speedier
and more accurate transmission of mes
sages l have had prepared and submit
for your reference an appendix which
touches upon this consideration. The
Attorney-General for the Department
assures me that the conclusion that the
limited postal telegraph plan is consti-
tutional can not be resisted"
The Postmaster-General then follows
with an elaborate explanation of the
limited plan and of it's expectations,
arguing that it would pay the telegraph
companies and be more efficient as well
as make lower prices. He concludes:
81 desire in concluding, as politely as
may be, to say one or two things that
are not understood. l have challenged
the most rigid scrutiny of the Limited
Postal Telegraph bill l ask to have
printed all of the criticisms Of it which
come to my notice as an argument in
its favor. The Limited Postal Tele-
graph bill is not a proposition to take
money from the treasury or to employ
additional civil servants; it is not a
proposition to put any power whatever
in the hands of the. Government which
is not at present greater and more
dangerous where it is. 1t is PROPOSE
ton simply to dovetail together two
great machines so that one shall do
business equitably and by that means
make more money, which shall be will
ingIy accorded to it by the people, the
other to, utilize its present skilled and
faithful energy to help supply the peo-
pie with still better means of communi-
cation furnished still more cheaply. 1t
Is a proposition incidentally to quicken
the telegraph service by encouraging
all the mem bers of the operators craft
to realize. that they are the better on
the more they are to devote themselves
to one thing, and are permitted to see
some results from their inventive genius,
1t is not a proposition to buy the
railroads or the coal mines, the saw
mills or the bake shops of the country.
1t is not a confession that American in
genuity is incapable OF keeping up with
the march of mercantile and industrial