To the charges made by Mr. Washburne, in the prefatory sentences of his
paper, against the management of the Telegraph system of the United
States, little need be said. They are without the shadow of proof, and
require no other answer than an explicit denial. Yet American telegraph
companies may justly complain that a public man, while ostensibly
performing a service in the interests of the people, should deem it
necessary to traduce a vast interest by the use of terms so broad as to
attract to it, even without proof of their justice, unwarranted
disparagement and suspicion.
Mr. Washburne’s statement that “the telegraphic system has made less
progress toward perfection, and has been practically of less value to
the masses of the people in our country, than in any other civilized
country on the globe,” is so sweepingly erroneous as to excite our
profound astonishment, which is increased by the still broader assertion
that, “while in nearly every country in Europe the telegraph has become
a speedy, certain, and economical medium of communication, the
inestimable benefits of which are extended to the inhabitants of small
towns and communes as well as to the great centres of trade, in this
country telegraphic communication has always been uncertain and
expensive, and limited to chief towns and cities.”