Evening star., 1901-07-05
POSTAL COMPANY PROTESTS
WANTS TO RUN ITS CABLES TO
CUBA.
Claims That Rival Grant Was linz
properly Obtained and That
1t Has Expired.

The Secretary of War has under consid-
Grafton a protest lodged by the Postal Tele-
graph Cable Company against tine exclusion
Of one OF its connecting cables from opera
tion in Cuba, as. 1t Is stated, has been re-
Quested by the Western Union Telegraph
Company. The Postal Telegraph table
Company claims that the sranr now owned
by the Western Union Company was OBJ
tanned by false and fraudulent representa-
tions: that the grant expired in 1880: that
it was not exclusive and has not been made
so; that there has not been any legal con-
donation Of the fraud or confirmation OF the
grant: and, lastly, that the rules of PUBLIC
policy, as laid down by President Grant
relative to Cuban monopolies. apply to the
Cuban cable in question.
The letter to Secretary Root quotes Pres
ident Grant In his annual message to Con-
gress Of 1875, in which he, said that 1t
seemed to him important. II not 1ndis-
pensable for the protection Of the public
against the extortions which may result
from a monopoly of the right Of operating
cables, that no company should be
allowed to land on the shores of the United
States under the concession from another
power. which does not admit the right OF
any other line or lines. formed in the
United States. to land and freely connect
with and operate through its land lines
The original grant of the Western Union
Company for a Cuban cable Is stated to
have been obtained from the Spanish gov
ernment in 1866. and the Postal Telegraph
Cable company claims that, In the same
year, fourteen-year exclusive grant as 10
Florida, the United States terminus of the
cable, was obt aimed from the United States
by the Western Union Company ION false
representations that Spain had already
granted a monopoly" Both these grants.
1t is claimed. expired by limitation In 1850.
and therefore the protesting company sets
forth its claim follows:
"Q) That the original fraud which In
validated the original grant of December 3.
1856, never became known to and was never
condoned by the Spanish government. but.
on the contrary. that fraud entered also
| into all the modifying DEGREES and grants
of the Spanish government, as is shown by
| the words of those modifying grants and
hence invalidates those grants also.
't2) That the nOn-excluSive feature of tie
original grant Of December 5, 1885, was not
rendered exclusive by any of the modifying
grants. inasmuch as such madifying grants
assumed that the original grant was ex-
elusive without making 1t so, and mas
much as there was no consideration Tor any
exclusive feature arising from the modify
ing grants, II such exclusive feature DID
arise therefrom.
"(3) That the original grant, by its very
terms. expired May 8. 1890, when the
United States grant expired. and that so
lar from the modifying grants changing
this feature of the original grant, the modi-
Iylng grants expressly state that the origi-
nal Spanish grant had expired II the United
States grant had expired.
"(4) That today there not only is no ex-
elusive grant, but there is no grant at all
to interfere with the laying of a competing
cable. and hence that the treaty of peace
Is not applicable, and the Foraker amend
meDt Is not applicable and the order to
General Brooke is based on a misapprehen-
sion OF the facts as well as of the law