The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-05-03
THE BUG IN THE CHARTER.

N1 R HENRY n. CLEMENT and DR.. E. R.
L Taylor are able and reputable lawyers In
The Call of Sunday these gentlemen
signed two reasons for the failure to provide in the
new charter for the regulation OF the rates and
charges OF the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Com
pany, and for the discrimination between that cor
poration and other monopolies, classified common
carriers. One of these reasons is the doubtful
stitutionality OF such municipal legislation, and the
other the supposed intermixture OF the business Of
the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, which
Is local concern, with the service OF the Sunset Tele
phone and Telegraph Company extending to all parts
OF the State.
1t not the function OF the press to determine con-
stitutona questions. 1t had been supposed however
that there could be doubt OF the power OF State
regulation in the particulars mentioned, and that the
only point in controversy the existence OF this
right in the municipality either by express specica
ton or under the implications of the law We have
not before us any direct adjudication on the subject
hut in the American Law Review for April May, 1906
a very able opinion by of the most prominent
lawyers in Kansas was published in which the rights
OF State control and OF the delegation of municipal
control over telephone companies was vigorously as
serted. In Massachusetts, also, perhaps in other
States the same views are entertained 1t that
all monopolies or even competitive associations de-
pending upon franchises or privileges derived from
the public should be subject restrictions in their
exactions and should not be permitted equally to
plumber the community at large and their private
toners.
This municipality has its regular legal adviser to
whom the constitutional question should be promptly
committed. If the State constitution as it exists
manacles the Legislature in dealing with telephone
companies it should be amended. We do not believe
that there is any such limitation. The other point
suggested by Mr.. Clement and DR.. Taylor can hardly
be sustained There can be no doubt that the State
jurisdiction of the Sunset Telephone and Telegraph
Company and the municipal jurisdiction OF the Pacific
Telephone and Telegraph Company are clearly dis
tinguishable To certain extent they may the
same wires and the same instruments But it is well
understood that the identity of each corporation is
separately maintained that each service is independent
OF the other that the accounts are not commingled
and that it is entirely practicable to the business
OF the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company as
distinct and complete within itself
The existence of this bug in the new charter, to
which The Call has invited the attention OF the pub
lie and of the municipal authorities, is unquestion-
able The constitutional doubt should have been re-
solved in favor of the people and not OF the telephone
monopoly There should be no delay or hesitation
in the exercise of lawful means to compel its submits
sion to reasonable supervision over its tariff and to
some recognition of the interests OF its customers
These monopoles, in alliance with the railroad have
virtually held themselves above the law in this State
and have treated the public with contempt It is time
to make them understand that the American people
live under free Government and not under private
despotsm