The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1906-11-15
A DISCUSSION ABOUT
TELEPHONE SERVICE


The following, which is re-publlshed !
from the Detroit Medical Journal, is |
given, not for the purpose of hamper |
ing or embarrassing the work or plans |
OF the new telephone company, but i'm |
the hope that it will start a discussion !
in matter that is of the most vital |
interest to the community. If discus |
sion shall bring out the vital and inn
portant considerations i'm matters af- !
fecting public service utilities, the Star
believes it will have performed meri- !
torious service by provoking it.
The matter from the Detroit Medical
Journal is as follows:
The Merchants Association of New
| York. took the trouble of making a
! thorough investigation Of the compe-
! titive telephone systems of the coun
| try and they started out with stating
that competition in telephone systems
! doubled it's need from a choice of
! benefits. but compels a cnoice of evils
either a half service or a double
price. The following is an extract from
| the minutCs of the Board of Estimates
! and of Apportionment: city of New
York, meeting i'm Room 16, city Hall,
Friday, June &c. 1905, as reported in
the city record official journal of the
City of New York, Wednesday, June
5, 1905. This was on the occasion OF
the Atlantic Telephone Co. making an
application for the right to lay, erect
and maintain in the streets of New
York wires. etc. for the purpose of
carrying on a general telephone ana
telegraph business in all the bur
roughs of the city.
REGULATION OF RATES BY COM
PETITION.
| The desirabilty of competition for
the means of regulating telephone
charges in the City of New York has
been presented to this city committee;
it has examined into that aspect of the
question.
1t is obvious that unless competition
results in reducing the cost of the tele-
phone service without impairing the
utility of the latter it cannot benefit
the public on the other hand, it in
creases the public aggregate outlay
and at the same time diminishes facili-
ties of inter-communicatlon and is a
positive detriment.
The committee made inquiries from
various states where competitive tele-
phone systems existed, to the effect
that competition resulted in an in
crease instead of a decreased burden
of cost, and is a divided service which
has materially INSTRUCTED intCr-com-
: munication. The business and profess
sional men find it impracticable to dis
pense with the established telephone
system, no matter what Inducements
of apparent low price may be offered
by a new company. General inter-
communication is the essential require
!, ment, especially for business men,
This cannot be assured by a competing
company in case of a divided service
The use of both systems and an in
creased outlay is compulsory.
Most of the telephones placed by a
, new competing telephone system dc
. not displace telephones already in use
but simply duplicate them. The rea
increase of business connections is
small and obtained at disproportonate
4 large cost This is illustrated by the
case of Baltimore. In that city the 10.
cal Bell Telephone Co. has somewhat
more than $4,000 stations; the hide
pendent Co. between five and six thou
sand. An examination of the list o
the two companies shows that more
than half of the Independent com
pany's subscribers are also subscriber
to the Bell. One merchant of Baltt
more stated emphatically that it in
creased the aggregate expense abou
so per cent, while the facilities are in
creased about II per cent If the new
facilities were combined with those o
the Bell company, instead of being $50
lated, they would be far more effective
and could be supplied at much les
cost.
: RESTRICTION OF UTILITY.
The effect of the rival telephone sys
TENS in one city is to divide the popu
lation and the business into two parts
without means of telephone communi
cation with each other except at eX
cessive cost, while a single system per
Y mts general communication, tw
" systems make it impractical Tw
systems, therefore, greatly restrict tn
utility of the telephone. The singl
'f system can perform the desired ser
'r vice much more efficiently and at les
cost than two systems can.
= GENERAL RESULTS OF TELE-
PHONE COMPETITION.
Competition in telephone service
not a public benefit and not a usefu
means of regulating telephone charges
w No benefit accrues to any part Of tn
r. public in the way Of reducing rates
Many consumers are compelled to i'm
n. crease their aggregate outlay Tn