The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-12-19
CITY works AND LABOR rRounL Es


In the speeches made in this country
by john Burns, the London labor agIta-
tor, who appears to be a strong, able
ana honest man. a sincere advocate of
the working classes, the questions of.
employment for labor has been present.
ed, with a partial remedy for the evil
OF unemployment. In Liverpool, Glas-
gov and London, the municipal owner
ship of gas and electric fighting
plants. waterworzs and street cars, is
said to- be the solution of the problem
OF providing work for the workless.
We do not see very clearly how that
cam accomplish much in the di-
rection sought. nor that it could be
properly adapted to the fud extent in
the United States, Why should NUM-
cipal corporation employ more men in
carrying on either or all of the enter
prises mentioned. than private cor
porations would employ? The idea con-
veyed is that men would be required
to do less work in a day on public
works than if they were engaged for
private work. If not. how would more
men be employed to do the same
things?
Of course it might be said that the
municipality would not endeavor to
make a profit out of The works and
that would cut some figure in the
problem. But would not that rather be
turned to the benefit of the public in
decreased rates. while the working peo-
pie would be required to give a fair
days work for a fair days wages just
as much for city as for a firm or
company?
Now as to the local application of
the proposition. We do not think it is
right for any municipal corporation to
engage in such a business as, supplying
private houses and families with gas,
or electric lights. or in the running
of street cars for fares. Private business
should be in private hands for private
profit. Public works for public benefit
are another thing entirely.
1t might be that Salt Lake city could
supply street lighting from a plant be-
longing to the city more profitably than
under the present system. But that is
open to question. We do not think it is
one of the duties of the city council to
so into the business of house lighting,
whether it could be made profitable or
not. 1t is not a public matter. Lighting
the streets is another thing. That is
for a public use. The city could make
its own gas or use its own electric
light plant for street purposes and for
public buildings, but would be trans
cending its powers in going into the
business of supplying private houses as
a speculation.
The same with regard to operating
street cars. That is not a, business in
which the city could lawfully engage.
No such power is bestowed in its
charter. That is a private business and
must be left to private companies or
corporations. But the city can regulate
those companies within certain bounds,
because they must be granted fran
chises from the city for the use of the
streets, etc. 1t is the same as to the
location and operation of gas and elec-
trio light plants and connections.
Supplying water to the inhabitants
comes under another category. The
people own the waiter or the right to
its reasonable use. The city corporation
is the agent of the people to direct
that use. Rates may be charged to
pay the necessary expenses of that
distribution. When more is charged
than sufficient to meet those expenses,
extortion is perpetrated and the city
council transcends its lawful powers.
On these considerations it appears
that Mr.. Burns alleged solution of the
problem of what to do with the un-
employed, would not solve the situa-
ton in this country. and we do not
see that it viii accomplish that OBJ
ject in any country where the works
he speaks of are established. The la
Dor problem is one of the most i'm
portant of the vexed questions of the
times and will probably trouble the
next century as it has troubled this. |