The Palatka news and advertiser. [volume] (Palatka, Fla.) 1908-19??, 1914-11-13
Two Telephone Systems In One Community
Declared Useless Waste BY Commissions

unnecessary that in towns and cities or villages
where telephone system already eXists-be 1T
"independent" rural or Bell-for any other COM
pany to exploit that feld."-Canada Railway
Commissioners, May 10, 1911.
"The Commission earnestly believes that it
would be wise if the legislature would prompt
the building of duplicate public utilities or the
grant of Franchises to such, prior to appllcatlon
to and issuance by this Commission OF certlfcates
of public convenience and necessity. In our opln-
ion, the government which properly assumes TO
prescribe reasonable rates and compel adequate
services by public utilities, should also protect
such utilities and the public from unwise or use.
less competition and the wasteful investment OF
money in unnecessary plants. Georgia Railroad
Commission, February a. 1914.
at rests upon the recognized fact that an
existing plant can be made, under proper regula-
ton, to give the public better service and at low
er cost than can competing plants. 1t requires
no argument at this late day to prove that COM
petng utilities in any municipality AID the SER
vice burdens of the public rather than lessen Them
In the case under consideration there are reasons
for not granting the application additional to the
recognition of the general principle that two COM
peting or non-competing utility plants are more
expensive to the public than one plant-W1scon-
sin Railroad Commission, March II, 1914.
at is nothing less than economic waste for
the people to be required to franchise competing
companies in order to bring about correction IN
charges, which manfestly should come through
the medium of an order by the public regulating
authorities requiring the established utilities TO
charge no more than a just and reasonable rate
The Commission must therefore, if public regula-
ton is to be effective have due regard for the
rights of the pubic as we'll as those of the corpo-
ration and in this respect should be taken to
see that the findings are not made upon the basis
of an ex parte showing Nevada Public Service
Commission, June Z, 1913.
Because the public service corporations are
supposed to be entitled to reasonable return on
their investment we do not believe that the pub
lie should be burdened with return on duplica-
lions of investment and the territory OF an exist
ing public utility company be invaded by COM
peting company when the utility already in exist
ence can be required to serve the public wherever
there is sufficient demand, and for these reasons
we have discouraged competition among utilities
where there is no absolute necessity therefor.-
Oregon Railroad Commission, October II, 1913.
at is now coming to be recognized that COM
petition cannot in all instances regulate rates in
public utilities, and that one company, properly
regulated and administered, can generally give
better and cheaper service than two 1t is waste
of capital and disadvantage to a city to have two
sets of telephone or electric light wires and poles
encumbering the streets when one can be made
to serve the same purpose. Most utilities are
natural monopolies and the highest efficiency and
the lowest rates are only possible when each one
has the entire business of a given city or terrific
ry Now that we have the right and duty to reg
uate all public service corporations the i'll effects
of monopoly may be escaped, and at the same time
the beneficial results of economy and efficiency
realized" Oregon Railroad Commission, October
81, 1913.
Long experience has shown that while the
temporary effect of composition between public
utilities occupying the same territory is to secure
lower rates. the final result is likely to be the alb
sorption of one by the other and then increase
Of rates to pay the expense of the warfare. The
experience of Ashland which once had two or
three competitive companies all of them absorbed
by the strongest is an illustration. The munich
paty in the case of companies furnishing light
is burdened with the inconvenience and difficult
ties which arise from the presence of duplicated
poles and wires and finally has to pay at least
reasonable return upon the increased capital re-
quired by such duplication. The question always
is by what means can the public convenience be
best served. "-Pennsylvania Public Service Com
mission, April 8, 1914.
"The question, however, is a practical one and
must receive a practical solution. 1t is in the
public interest that competing plants should be
consolidated
"There are many important differences be-
tween public service corporations and ordinary
commercial enterprises. The former usually re-
quire much larger investment in plant, equip
ment and other fixed property, which in turn
means neaVy annual charges Tor interest, repairs
and maintenance. The conditions which sur
round the former also of such character that
the services which they render can usually be fur
nished at much lower cost by one plant than
by two or more in the same locality = =
Duplication of such plants is waste of capital.
whenever the services can be adequately furnish
ed by one plant. 1t necessarily means that inter-
est and maintenance must be earned on a much
greater, if not twice as great an investment. and
that the actual cost of operation is likely to be
relatively higher. In re application La Crosse
Gas Electric Co., Wisconsin R. c. Report, 5.'
New Hampshire Public Service Commission.
February 20, 1912.
If there is any claim of inadequacy or lack of
efficiency in the telephone service now furnished