Morris tribune. [volume] (Morris, Minn.) 1880-2000, 1894-10-03
NATIONAL FIZZLE!!
Government Ownership Of Rail-
ways Would Be Just That.

Beware the Peoples Party
Bargain Table, For Their
Brand New Schemes Have
Been Weighed and Found
Wanting, Times Without
Number. Years and Years
Ago.
An examination of the financial prob
lem involved in the government owner
ship and operation of railroads has
shown that it would bankrupt the
credit of this country if attempted; and
that the entire net earnings of the roads
under the present system, which are
presumably larger than they would be
under the less economical system of
public management, would be INSULT
cient to pay the lowest rate of interest
at which bonds could be fioated, or an
amount equivalent to the sum for which
they could be condemned under the
law of eminent domain, or bought at
private sale,
This will seem to determine, from
one direction, the total impracticability
of the Populistic idea of the nationaliza-
ton of railroads. 1t has proved to be
just as undesirable by another mass of
conclusive testimony drawn from the
experience of governments which have
already engaged in the business.
Beware of the Peoples Party Political
Bargain Table.
? tt is common to all the novelties OK
posed by the Peoples party on the polit-
ical bargain table, that they ignore the
facts of past human experience. Any
body would think, for instance, to listen
to Populist speeches and to read Popu-
list campaign documents that the free
coinage of silver was a brand new
scheme, evolved from somebody's brain
W thin the last year or two, and de.
pendent upon theory for acceptance or
rejection. The fact is, to the contrary,
as every moderately well informed per-
son is aware, that the Populist idea of
money and what can be done with it, is
as old as money itself; and that the ex-
pertinent which they are anxious to try.
has been tried hundreds of times and
has ended in failure, panic and utter
business ruin, without single excep-
ton.
One would suppose in like manner
that the national ownership and con-
troll of railroads was beautiful inven-
ton of late date, and that we would
have to experiment with it before we
could determine just how it would work
in practice. On the contrary, there is
abundant information, easily obtainable
from current and standard works on
the railroad question, and also from
recent official publication of the United
States government, to teach us how
state ownership has worked in other
parts of the world.
Facts About Government Ownership of
Railroads.
Il is true that no important govern
ments have adopted the system in its
entirety. The results of a partial adop-
tio1 of it have not been satisfactory
enough for that.
Only two governments in the world,
Egypt and Nicaragua, with total
mileage of less than fourteen hundred
miles, own and operate their entire
railroad systems.
Ten governments, including some of
the most enlightened and freest people
in the world, do not own or operate
railways at all.
Eighteen governments have mixed
Byst0ru, pau of 6lae roads being owned
by private companies and another part
by the state. This system has been
adopted most largely on the continent
Of Europe, and seems to be perfectly
well adapted to the monarchical and
forms of government
which flourish there.
Three governments, Greece, Holland
and Italy, own part Of their railways
but do not operate them at all. They
are operated under lease by private
will be seen that an immense ma
jority of the railroad mileage of the
world is uadee private control. In
Austria about 40 per cent of the railway
mileage is owned, a1d about 70 per
cent is operated by the state. In Bel
gium three-four:hs of the mileage is
under state control, and railroad affairs
are administered in connection with
postofices and telegraphs by govern
ment department. In Canada about
of the total mileage of Is, 900
miles, is owned and controlled by the
gov rnment.
The Experience of France Should Be
lesson.
The system in France is peculiar.
After very unsatisfactory experience,
both with unrestricted private competi.
Jon and state management, the terri
5Ory Of France was finally partitioned |
among six great companies. Each has |
! distr ct within which it alone is al |
owed to do business, and competition
s prohibited. In order to secure to the |
public adequate facilities, where private |
ownership is thus denied, it was neces-
AIRY for the govern ment to give largo |
and financial support to
he roads. It has provided from
$3.50, Oo0, 900 to 81, Coz, 900, 900 of capital,
" from one.fourth to one-third Of tho
whole, and guarantees q large govern
nent interest OH the capital provided by
private investors, at a rate ranging
rom the minimum of 7 per cent to the
maximum of 1879 per cent. About FIVE
ixths of the. entire mileage of the re-
public is now operated under this gys-
EN-. It was originally proposed to have
he railroads of France nationalized,
nut the obvious necessity of enormous
axation to bring this about caused the
chelno to be abandoned 10 years ago.
tally Went Into the Raiiroad Business,
and Failed,
In Germany, national ownership re-
eived great impulse from the fact
nat the railways OF Prussia were al
4ady IInder atata control before tha |