The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1899-07-11
WHAT TELEPHONE USERS SAY.

Expressions or Leading Business Men
IN Principal Cities of Seven States.
LINCOLN, Ill.-''I regard two tele-
phone systems a. confusing, expensive
THOMAS h. STOKES"
DANVILLE, nI.-"To be required to
use two telephones In the same ONCE Is
certainly a very great nuisance ana an
unnecessary expense.
DAVENPORT. Iowa.-"Better one
good telephone system at decent price
than twenty poor ones, even though VIC
have them for nothing.
DAVENPORT OUTLOOK"
GRAND RAPIDS. Mich.-"It is a
perfect nuisance. II costs more and Is
81 more bother. / have to pay for four
phones. i would be in favor OF con-
solIdation. "DR. L. E. BEST"
GRAND RAPIDS, Aiich.-"I think the
use Of two phones on different lines Is
a nuisance, and ! win be glad to see the
time, which believe will surely come
when 1t will be abolished by the eXter-
mlnatlon OF one line by the other.
Business men are much annoyed by
residence phone-users calling up ana
requiring the transfer OF a message
from one line to another as favor;
JOHN E. PECK"
BELyIDERE, Ill.-"I consider two
telephones in our town a nuisance;
WILLIAM H. PEEL"
TOLEDO, Oft is a great null
sance to have two different systems OF
telephones in the same city and we
find II especially inconvenlent to have
SO many wires In our building.
"sPITZER & COMPANY.
sANDUsKY, OF have not found
that the use of two telephone systems
is Of any advantage. On the contrary
the expense Of two telephones Is great
err than the old phone was before the
new system was introduced. 49,,
"DR. ALTA T. COOK"
DECATUR, Irl.-''A person Is obliged
to have the two phones in order to be
able to talk to all the persons having
telephones, and we are often annoyed
by having a subscriber on one line cali
over the other line.
COMPANY"
DECATUR, Ill.-"Two telephone sys-
tens in one city are nuisance as re-
cards the service and no saving from
financial standpoint.
80 ''R. w. FERGUSON"
BRAZIL, Ind.-"We cannot under
stand how two telephone systems could
be Of any advantage in any city, when
such perfect service can be given by
one system. j. v. AVER
sHELBYVILLE. Ind.-"The use OF
two telephones in an office or place OF
business is great nuisance, and 1t
would be far better IL but one system
or company's phone was In use IN
city Of town. D. L. WILSON.
FORT WAYNE, Ind.-'we have no
comments whatever to offer in favor OF
using two telephones in our place OF
business. Why should we be
compelled to pay for two phones when
one will answer all practical purposes?
"GRosS & PELLEES."
ST. JOSEPH, Mo.-"we feel that a
city has as much use for two telephones
as a dog has for two tails. We are
paying bitterly for what We thought at
one time might be good thing:
"F. C. HARRINGTON"
ST. JOSEPH, Mo.-"In our opinion.
It Is a great mistake for two telephone
companies to try to do business In the
same city, and we can very plainly see
that II has not resulted in any better
service, and has CAUSED a great deal OF
unnecessary expense by compelling
some concerns to have two telephones.
when they did not really gain anything
thereby. but were simply forced to put
in a second telephone. This seems 70
US to be very unfortunate state OF al
fairs. r. w. POWELL
ST. JOSEPH, Mo.-"After my exper-
fence here with two telephones, must
candidly confess that when the mat
ter was first talked OF in our city,
though: It a big thing, but, to my sor-
row, ! find 1t useless expense.
IF. NJ. GARLICHS."
TOPEKA. Kns.-S"we had the Bell
'phone taken out, but after trying for
several months to get along without H.
we were compelled to have 1t put back.
The two phones made the cost OF ser
vice more than business would Justify
80 we took out the new one and find we
get along well without It.
TOPEKA, Kas.-"we find In business
that It Is a very rare occurrence wneh
we have business communication
through one telephone that cannot be
attended 10 through the other tele-
phone. on general principles 1t Is
nuisance without being benefit In any
respect. CRANE & COMPANY.
LEAVENwoRTH. Kas.-"we find
that two telephone companies In our
town are not perfectly satisfactory TO
us, us to Increase the expense for tele-
phone service, and we find no better
results for having two Instruments IN
our office. .~,
1.-THE VIM. G. HEsSE & SON NAN
UFAcTURING COMPANY"
LEAvENwoRTH, Kas.-''The con-
struction Of their entire plant Is such as
10 convince me beyond doubt that 1t
was built with a view of selling out.
The whole thing summed up In nut
shell Is that there is certainly no econ
omy In having two companies, consiu-
erinE both exchanges to be perfect;
Louis NJ. ERB."
KANKAKEE, I'LL consider two
telephone systems in the same city or
town a great nuisance and double the
expense. l have four places and now
have eight telephones. Any one can
see that there is no economy In this
"T. B. REED"