The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-04-27

| trious mind as the telephone. No vel
1 managed, honestly financed inGepend-
| ent telephone company ever failed, mol
| has one ever lacked for patronage. This
| may seem a remarkable statement but
! I defy a successful contradiction.
It present the only plan of afdiat-
| ing between exchanges is through long
| distance contracts and many OF these
| Perhaps are not altogether in accord
with our laws so that should we at
| tempt to enforce them We might FIND
| that our cause of action was not we'll
| founded. Those who have made this
| new organization a study viii be heard
| later on the subject and you will be able
to judge If 1t is good for US to adopt
Kansas Big Telephone State.
According to the government statis-
Ivtics on the telephone industry of the
United States, Kansas has 200.333 tele-
phones, of which 161.913 arc non-Bel,
leaving that company only 1920. In
asnluch as the government relied upon
the individual companies to voluntarily
report their properties it is fair to as
sumo that the Bell company reported
every phone they could possibly include
and that due to negligence en- the part
of Independent and Mutual companies
many thousands were never reported.
This same report gives the number OF
Independent phones that have some
toll connection with the Bell company
as $3.50. As these figures were also
furnished the government by the Bell
II
sumo that it contains every subicensee
phone in the state. Deduct this number
from the total Independent or non Bell
telephones and we still have 95,O3S tele-
phones without any but Independent
toll line connections.
These figures disclose two SuggeS-
tons: First, that this industry repre-
senting 1898 telephones, although
owned and operated each independent
of the other with no uniform power of
control can. through the agency OF a
continuing membership contract Sucn
as is being proposed by the National
Association, safeguard its property
against the unfair competitive tactics
of our competitor which we are COM
PEELED to meet even to the extent OF
free service which many OF US are COM
PEELED to fight.
1.-The second thought, is that the cap
.tal invested in this great and state
wide industry is furnished almost en-
tirely by the citizens of Kansas and II
the laws of orr state are not sufficient
ly broad, to protect our citizens in legl-
innate competition, this organization or
men should make it their duty to see
that such laws are passed. BY Iegltl-
mate competition mean that every
patron of telephone company should
be made to pay the same price for SER
vice that every other person pays for
a like service. If free passes are wrong
and corrupting for the railroads, why
then are not free telephone service and
discriminatory rates wrong for any pub
lie utility? The rule of every man pay
ing for what he gets is a good rule, ana
in public service corporations all should
be made to pay alike for q ike service
This permits of different rates in differ
ent exchanges, but prohibits part OF
the people getting free service at the
expense of those who pay. This VIII
stop the graft and special faVors and
put the utility before the public with
clean hands and keep them clean. The
public utilities of our state should not
be requiring political favorS any more
than the ordinary business enterprise,
neither should they be made the target
of designing politicians
Fair Play for All.
"CompeI every utility company in
Kansas to charge each patron OF its
service the same price that all others
ray for the same service and you ell1n1-
Iate these corporations from the poltl-
cal arena and remove one Of the very
disagreeable features of the business.
Such law should be in the interest OF
both the public and the corporations.
Free service and cut rates are the
weapon of the big trust. 1t has neither
justice or merit and is unWarranted and
wrong. This body of men in my 1udg-
ment can do nothing more deserving o.
credit to themselves or their patrons
than to encourage and support the pass
age of such a law as will prevent these
business methoCS being pract1ced- The
principles for which this ASSOCIATION
stands and for which it should ask our
lawmakers to grant is the right to De
protected in fair, honorable and open
competition in the business. We Go not
recognize as honest the purpose or
claim of universal service.
Its avowed object is a monopoly, II
means the absolute domination of the
business by a few men who have moth
ing in keeping with the public's wishes
other than to exact all it can get and
do as little as possible in return We
recognize competition as just We wish
it to remain. An Independent trust
might be no better than Bell trust,
but 1 do lay stress on the fact that
both should be made to compete in Civ
ing the highest possible standard OF
service and treatment to its patrons
and that both should be compelled un-
der the penalty of a rigid law to charge
every patron alike for given service.
1t is grossly unfair to either side that
one should be permitted to give its
service free to some or at discrimina-
tory rates to others. 1t is likewise I'M
fair to those who do pay, and is not
within the meaning. The
or individual with the
largest cash reserve has an unequal ad-
vantage and the public in the end must |
suffer. The victor is certain to collect |
his loss when once his competitor is |
. " KR