The labor argus. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1906-1915, 1907-12-12

p1itor Labor Argus-NoDody
Z D,,sS! ret given a good reason why
city council should pass the
snoSs1 = va ordinance to allow the
FogUs1t Iope telephone Company to in,
snso one its rates. No sensible man
n T' br found who believes the
nmnany NJ makes less money the
sore ,rr patronage it has, and that IS
y S'o onIy reason, real or alleged,
nvone has given for the passage
I ' the ordinance. Suppose the
nmnany had five hundred sub
sribers gTpI at Il 80 per month each.
Sat hat would bring it an income of
Fi5O per month. Now increase
10 % nnmber of subscribers to 5000,
tbe same rate per month, and
se monthly income is 81, 800. We
re- asked to believe that the ex.
epse of serving the increased
rmbpr increases more than the
mount of income, so that the lar
rer number with the larger receipts
rould be less profitable than the
mailer number with the smaller
|eceipts. When you say you don't
believe such all absurd proposition
FOu are told that it is because you
don't know anything about the
ieIepbone business. That is the
bnly reply that the boosters for the
telephone game make.
But here, dearly beloved, is
something that we all understand.
The Home Telephone Company
was given a franchise that was sat
isfactory to it, and under which it
proceeded to do business. Sever
al years ago-along in 1901-the
men interested in it went about
over the town and solicited sub
scribers on the plea that the
was made up of home
people, that it was organized to
break up the monopoly enjoyed by
he Bell; that if the people would
1atronize it the service would be
irst class, and at cheaper rates
han those charged by the Bell be-
ore the organization of the Home
For the reasons given
nauy pcrsous had the Home
DhOnes put in their homes and
,laces Of business, in numbers ot
Instances throwing out the Bell
finally the time arrived when the
1Ome company had more subscri'
,erS than the Bell-secured, mind
'Ou, by reason of the lower rate
nd the desire to reward the com
AMY for giving the cheaper service
and, 10! the same men who wen
bout asking for subscribers on pa
Hotic grounds, now 60 before
ounciI and say that because th'
'e0pIc did rally to their support II
uch numbers it has become nee
SSary to raise the rate. In other
rords the kindness of the people
0 the company must be paid fol
y the people in the increased rat'
Skcd.
A friend was telling me a story
he other day of o man whom
e knew who had lived for year.
a rented house. Finally h
lok a notion that he wanted,a Gel
'r and asked his landlord to haV'
ne dug, The landlord refused
nd so the man had the cellar dug
ld finished up at his own expense
hen the landlord raised the rem
u the house, because it had a Gel
II under it. No man of a proper
Iode of thought will uphold TIN
action, yet it is notion
lore whit Of a gouge than the pro
oSeu increase OF rates by Tn
lone Telephone Company.
The city council will make
rave mistake if it passes the en-
bling ordinance, and we sincerel!
opc it will not do so. Right; jus
&c and policy, both partisan AM
uhlic, are all against il. In con
Usion we PROFOUND the following
ueStion to both the mail and Ga
cite: Are you for or against th
harleston Home Telephone Com
any being granted the proposes
mendment to their charter noN
ending before councilR Answe
eS or no, so that the people ma
now under which flag you sal