Same Streets
← All stories

The Telephone Monopoly Seattle Refused to Break

A national syndicate promised cheap telephones and a rival to Bell. Seattle's aldermen said no, and the city stayed in the Sunset Telephone Company's grip.

One of the greatest aggregations of capital ever formed in the United States has entered the field in competition with the Bell telephone monopoly and is preparing to put a new system of phones in every city in the Union at a price that will place them within reach of the poor man's pocketbook. But thanks to the action of certain members of the city council, Seattle is not likely to share in the benefits of this new move.

About a year ago the local corporation of this combination, the Home Telephone Company, applied to the council for a franchise. After it had passed the house of delegates it was rejected by the board of aldermen. The parent company has organized subsidiary corporations in various sections of the country; the one for the Pacific Northwest is named the Pacific Standard Telephone Company. The aggregation of capital involved is $30,000,000.

In March 1894 a representative of the combination was in this city from Chicago and interested some of the best local capital. S. H. Piles, representing the combine, introduced an ordinance asking for a franchise and stating that the rate of charges would be $2 per month for residences and $3 per month for business houses. The franchise passed the house of delegates but was defeated in the board of aldermen. Clise, Sweeney, Lovejoy and Compton voted against it. Now Tacoma, Portland, Helena and other Western cities will soon enjoy the privileges guaranteed by the combine, but Seattle will have no representation, being still at the mercy of the Sunset Telephone Company.

The Chicago and New York papers have been full of news concerning the new deal. The Chicago Times-Herald recently stated that the new enterprise is backed by the sugar trust, the Standard Oil Company, the immensely wealthy Crocker interests of California and the Pullman company interests. It also has among the men 'in on the ground floor' some of the shrewdest capitalists of every city in the Union. Parallel with its line of capitalists is a line of politicians who rank among politicians in the same fashion that the interested capitalists do among moneyed men. It is safe to say that the amount of political influence concentrated is enough to make any desired friendly legislation easier to obtain and to make hostile legislation harder.

The company is the Standard Telephone Company of New York. The electrical devices to be used are those of Allen T. Nye, who ten years ago made a prolonged fight on the original patent covering the transmission of speech by means of a wire. He was unsuccessful then, but the expiration of that patent about a year ago gave him the benefit of what he tried to gain by litigation. The company now proposes to put in telephones all over the country at a uniform price of $8 a year and make what is now a luxury and a convenience within the means of comparatively a few a reality within the means of the great body of the public.

Why Seattle Is Not Included.

Seattle is omitted from the list because the city council refused to grant a franchise to the new company. When S. H. Piles was seen yesterday regarding the ordinance which was defeated, and was asked if it was likely Seattle stood any chance of getting into the combine some time in the future, he said: 'I don't know anything about that. Their man was here and the council would not give him a franchise. He said he wanted a free, fair and open franchise, but the council wanted him to put up a cash bond of about $1,500 and agree to have the plant in working order in six months or forfeit the money and the franchise. He was disgusted with the outlook and told me if the people wanted to foster monopolies they could, and that he would go elsewhere to find a place to put his capital. He said that in good times the present company here cleaned up $50,000 a year clear. I don't think he will be back.'

Still Exacting Old Rates.

It will be remembered that immediately thereafter an ordinance was introduced arbitrarily reducing the rates of the Sunset Telephone Company. Later a petition was received signed by telephone subscribers asking that the ordinance cutting the rates be not enforced. Almost simultaneously another petition with 301 signatures was filed asking that the cut be enforced. The aldermen decided to recommend that the authorities abide by the wishes of the majority and that the old rates be allowed to be collected. Thus the matter now rests.

“He was disgusted with the outlook and told me if the people wanted to foster monopolies they could, and that he would go elsewhere to find a place to put his capital.”

— Printed in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895
Then · 1895131 years apartNow · 2026

This 1890s phone fight was an early municipal-franchise battle over whether a city would let a single utility set the price of essential communication. Seattle's aldermen chose the incumbent, and the city missed the cheaper rival. Today the same questions surface in fights over broadband, municipal internet, and who can afford to be connected.

The original page

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-04-14. Library of Congress, Chronicling America.

From readers

No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.

About this story

From
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, APR 14, 1895, Page 7
Text
Cleaned up from the page — spelling and layout repaired — not a word-for-word transcription. The page itself is above, for exact wording.
Rights
Public domain
Place
47.60323, -122.33028 · placed automatically
The paper in the Library of Congress catalog ↗