The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1897-03-15
THE PRESS.
MONDAY MARCH Is.
CORPORATIONS AND EXCLUSIVE
PRIVILEGES.

On Saturday the ERhCo Uupllsn0u al
extended address by franklin G. Pay
son, Esd, before the committee on legal
affairs, in defence of the clause of chapter
l0s, Public Laws of 1895, which provides
that except by special act of legislature.
or with the consent of existing companies,
no electric light and power company shall
operate In territories in which another
similar company is already operating or
is authorized to operate. Much OF the
address is sound and we have no fault to
find with many of his positions. 1t Is
true that corporations organized for GER
tain purposes ought to be accorded ex-
elusive privileges; but the reasons given
by Mr.. Payson to justify these exclusive
privileges are not sound, or if sound,
then every corporation, partnership and
individual has the same right to them.
which the corporations that enjoy them
have. Mr.. Payson sets forth these reasons
as follows:
Yirst-It (the restrictive provision of
the law of 1880 states in express terms
what has always been the implied policy
of the State Of Maine.
Second-If not retained, any three or
nors persons may organize as many
Electric light or gas companies as they
SIease, and go into any city or town
where company already exists, and
every existing company at once become
subjected to the schemes of blackmailers
and irresponsible persons who have no
idea of doing a legitimate business but
who organize and get their charter in the
hope OF compelling the existing company
to buy them off.
-Third-They also become subject to un-
just competition from persons who do
mean in good faith to go Rinto, business,
but who select a limited area in the city
or town where they propose to operate.
AS an illustration. consider our electric
light company in Portland. The present
company must supply not only the little
secti1n in the heart of the city where the
circuit is short and the expense compare
lively small, but it must supply the out
skirts and maintain long circuits and in.
order to do that 1t is necessary to have
an average rate of charges. rate which
will fairly cover the entire city, SO that
the rates for the same service will be the
same at either end Of the city as on tx
change or Middle streets.
First, according to Mr. Payson, the re-
strietion policy of the law of 1895 is
right, because 1t follows what has always
OOoiA ohO P'1ca poiiSy "a UAO oudUCs t9O
far from being the. fact this is, we claim,
as regards electric light companies at
least, directly contrary to the fact. Up
to the passage of the act of 1895 there
were no signs of restrictive policy in
the legislation of the state The legisla-
ture of 1888 chartered three electric light
and power companies, all of them with
exactly the same rights and privileges,
and all of them authorized to operate in
any towns or city in this state, and two
Of them composed entirely of people re-
sizing in Portland and immediate vioini-
by. To no one Of them was given an ex-
elusive right or privilege of any Kind.
Since that time numerous other COM
panies have been chartered and we have
failed to find single. one that was
granted an exclusive privilege. The COM
pany now operating in this city which
was organized under the general law,
obtained from the legislature of 1891
certain ritghs Of eminent domain. but
did not get any exclusive privilege So
much for the policy of the state
Mr.. Payson's second reason for the re-
strictive provision is that it is given to
protect these electric light companies
from blackmailsrs. that is; from corpora
lions that have no idea of doing business
but organize simply to compel existing
companies to buy them off. If this is
sound reason for protecting electric corpo-
rations it is an equally sound reason for
protecting all other corporations, and not
corporations alone, but partnerships and
individuals also. Every kiud of business
is exposed to the assaults of blackmailers,
and if the law is to erect defances AGAINST
them around one kind of business, then
it should erect them around all. If the
Legislature protects one and refuses an
other equally worthy then Ii is guilty of
individual Iavoritism. But notoriously
nine-tenths Of the corporations organized
under the law Of the state get no proteo-
ton at all.
Mr.. Payson's third reason is that with
out the restrictive provision electric light
companies may be subjected to unjust or