Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1899-09-23

cial Cable company of Cuba from
landing its proposed cable on that
island.
This drastic action was taken on
the claim of the Western Union Tele-
graph company that it has an exclu-
sive right to cable landing there, and
hence monopoly of telegraphic serv-
ice between Cuba and the United
States. The validity of this claim is
denied by the Commercial Cable COM
pany, which charges, and holds itself
ready to prove, that the Western
Union concession was obtained by
false and fraudulent representations.
Attorney General Griggs, to whom
the question was referred, gave the
opinion that the government should
protect the monopoly, and yet he de-
clared that this department has not
assumed to pass upon the validity OF
the exclusive right which the
Western Union Telegraph COM
panv and its leased companies
claim Then why should the
government assume to protect that
right when it's validity is denied and
proof of it's invalidity is offered? If
this charge is true, the monopoly is
not only without any legal or official
warrant, but is q fraud on the govern
ment and an imposition on the public
Can the government afford to protect
concern under such a cloud or lend
Itself to such an alleged fraud and i'm
position?
In his letter to Secretary Alger,
Clarence ii. Mackay, president of the
Commercial Cable company, of Cuba,
says:
- We desire to lay competing ca
BILE. We ask no money from the gov
eminent. We are bound in writing
to place this cable ut the SER
vice of the government, and al
low the government to fix it's own
rates for the use thereof. We have
agreed in writing to allow the govern
ment to take the title to the cable at
any time, and pay us the appraised
value thereof.
We ask nothing from the govern
ment in return for all this except to
be let alone.'
What fairer proposition could be
made? What better assurance is
needed of the Commercial Cable COM
pany's confidence in its ability to sub
stantiate its charge of fraud and in
validity in court of law if the West
ern Union should attempt there to
assert its monopoly. Under what
obligation is the government of the
United States to defend the Western
Union monopoly against direct charges
of fraud and protect it against COM
petition? Why not let it defend
1orht l,af 10
good its own claim, if it can, in a
mercial asks. What right, reason or
business has the Western Union to ask
for more?
There is a paramount public as
pect of this matter which the govern
ment cannot afford either to lose sight
of er underestimate its Importance.
Mouopolies are ALWAYS odious in the
eyes of the law and against public
policy. Fair, open competition is
favored by the people and should be
encouraged by the government, which
represents the people and whose bust
ness it is to foster their interests.
This is specially true with regard to
telegraphic communication between
Cuba and the United States. That
island has now passed under Ameri-
can control. New life is to be in
fused into it by American enterprise,
activity and capital. The business
and personal relations between its
people and those of the United States
have entered upon a new era. The
time has passed for an inefficient
cable monopoly at exorbitant rates.
What is imperatively needed and de-
mauded is that efficient service at rea-
sonable rates which is denied by mo-
nopoly and afforded by fair compe-
titiOn.
The Commercial Cable company
of Cuba proposes to give the press,
the business world and the public a
better and a cheaper service. That
would be a boon both to Cuba and
this country. 1t is the part of the
government to do everything in its
power to bring it about. We trust
that the authorities at Washington
will, on reconsideration, take this
view of the matter and act accord
ingly."