Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1888-04-28

prime motive being gain, the public
will get as much as conduceS to gain
ard not jot more. The employee
will get what he can and not what
be earns. The incentive to the en-
terprise permits nothing else. Pub
lie convenience, public safety and
honestly-paid employees are on ore
side and profit on the other; and in
these days of graspishnoss it would
be folly to dream what profit could
be set aside for decency's sake or for
rights sake.
Logically considered, any enter
prise instituted for the use of the
people should be under the control
of the peoplc-should in fact be the
property of the people, that is, of
the government, for in we'll ordered
republic the people are the govern
ment. 1t has often been mooted that
the government, or people, could
not successfully conduct such enter
prses as those alluded to; but those
who can care for the tremendous
financial interests of nation. regu-
late its trade relations and guide its
diplomatic affairs. could surely gude
It's public industries. If the people
can choose agents to successfully deal
with a nation Of fifty millions, in
volving the handling of hundreds Of
millions Of dollars they can certainly
care for public industries employing
few thousand of themselves at an
expenditure of few millions. Nor
is it nationally to be doubted that
public industries established for'the
public convenience would be better
managed for the peoples interest by
the people themselves than by cor
porations whose sole object is profit
As matter of right, an institu
ton conducted purely for the popu-
lar welfare belongs to the people.
They sustain it, and by the fact of
sustaining it, it is theirs. Without
them it would be so much obstructive
material to be cleared away rs a
nuisance. They make it all that it
is and, so that no wrong is done the
protector, they have the right to as
sumo the control IN behalf Of the
public welfare. BY the mere accept
ance of certain limitations at the
hands Of the government-the peo-
pe-th projectors acknowledge gov
ornamental control and confess the
popular right to increase that con-
troll to any point whenever the people
care to assume their rights. Nor is
it simply u right on the part OF the
government to take possession Of
public industries. 1t is a duty, and
the people are false to themselves
when they fail to take into their own
management that which is being mis-
managed to their detriment.
AS to what constitutes public in
dustry there must naturally be Il d.
yerslty of opinion. The moderate
majority will incline to pronounce
that public industry which is es-
tabllshed for the use of the people at
large and is used by them on large
scale.
1t is this application of the meas
ure of largeness that so many people
to-day are in favor of the government
taking control of the telegraph lines
and placing them under the manage
ment of the postal department.
The same idea obtains with others
who favor governmental control of
the railroads; but they stop short at
these two systems Of public service
and, advocating these measures, ig-
more the right to apply the principle
further. So much advocacy, how
ever, is fair evidence that there is a
tendency to acknowledge popular
ownership of public institutions and
the application of the principle in
part must eventually lead to its APP
pIicatlon as whoe-by gentle de.
grees, of course, and in great length
of time. Then occurs the question,
"Where does any industry appealing
to the people for patronage cease tc
be public industry?' Is that only
public industry which has become
public necessity? Or, is any IN
dustry to be considered a public one
and liable to be taken charge of by
the people, which is only a eonyen
| ,u,,r., a.. tLn,,, . M. ....... -. =. j .--- -