Missouri Valley times. [volume] (Missouri Valley, Iowa) 1874-1931, 1913-04-03
SHY[OCK APPEARS
'P|KER' COMPARED
TO PHONE TRUST
Postal Telegraph Company Is
sues Statement Showing A.
legged Effects Of Monopoli-
zation BY Bell System.
PRICES ALWAYS HIGHER
Cheaper Service Where Com
petitive- Condition Exists
Greed Regulates Rate, Cir
cular Declares.

New York. April 3.-In the matter of
telephone rates as charged by the Bell
Telephone company in the various
cities where competition does not ex-
list. the National League of Commission
Merchants, the International Apple
Shippers association and the Western
Fruit Jobbers' Association of America
are keenly interested These national
bodies have, through their committees.
done a great deal toward rghting the
wrongs perpetrated by transportation
companies private car lines and leg
islative bodies, but the subject of local
telephone rates In uoneompetitive cities
where their members are located has
just lately been receiving their at
tention.
Postai's Statement.
There certainly Is food for thought
in q statement just issued by the
Postsl Telegraph company. This state
ment says, in part:
with Bell monopoly and the other
with competition. the rates of monop-
oily are twice those of competition.
Compare the figures below for Your
selves and then tell us If we are
not right Shylock was modest. COM
pared with the Bell Telephone com
panN. No wonder the different cities
arc waking up and demanding why
this Is.
Note that in every instance the rate
in cities where there is competition is
a fiat rate for an unlimited number
of calls. In lnany of the cities where
the Bell has a monopoly that com
pany has tried to get away from the
unlimited service rate and substitute
therefor the limited service rate. A
glaring example OF this is found in
the city of Baltimore whore the Bell
has monopoly. Prior to January 1
1913. the rate for business telephones
was sl25 per annum for an unlimited
call rate and inaugura ted the limited
service rate. Under the latter plan the
business man who has 5,4O0 calls q
Year now pays $174 per annum as
against $l25 per anntm under the old
unlimited plan. He pays more for less
Comparative Rates.
why should the Bell telephone rate
in Chicago. having population of q
i 2S3, and where there is telephone
competition. be siza ,E.r ann,nn for al
unlimited number of caiia While the
Bell telephone monopoly in Washing
ton. d. c., having population of bu,
33l .069 is Sl6S per annum for ), 700 calls
And why should the Bell telephone rate
IN st. Louis. having population o1
odt,UlS, ana WIlere tnefe is telephone
competition. be SIS per annum for ~,
unlimited number of calls. while the
Bell telephone monopoly rate in Denver
having population of but 213 381, i.
sl3S per annum for 800 calls? Where
the Bell has monopoly its rate is
regulated by its greed
I'm Boston. on February Is. Mr.
Vail, the president OF the American
Telephone and Telegraph company. IL
an address before the Merchants club
said
Competition In public service sys
! tems cannot go hand in hand witt
state or national regulation or con
! troll. Regulation or control was in
tended to leave no margin In the per
mitted charges for service to pay th;
capital charges ON duplicated plants
or maintain two or more plants at 8
! high state of efficiency when one woulf
answer public requirements This
makes impossible those conditions un.
der which competition thrives but IN
I it's place brings about all the practica
results and advantages to be derived
| from state or national ownership, with
ont any of it's attendant obligations OF
disadvantages of government opera
ton
Compare this statement with tn,
accompanying table and see what mo
nopoly has done to the public IN th,
way of telephone rates.