The San Francisco call., 1896-01-21
A QUERY FOR POPUL|STS.
Without Bonds How Can Mu-
nicipal Ownership Be
Commenced?
LESSONS FROM OTHER LANDS.
Mayor Davie Expounds Conundrum
in Defense of His Views Re-
lating to Bonds.
OAKLAND OFFICE SAN FRANCISCO CALI

TUo broadway, Jan. ~.
Mayor Davie has been quietly compiling
a statement that he will soon make public
and which will undoubtedly provoke dis
cussion from leading Populists all over the
country. The question involves the vital
principle of the Populistic doctrine regard
ing the municipal ownership of water and
gas plants and street railroads.
If bonds are not to be issued for the first
purchase of these plants how is the money
to make the purchase to be raised?" That
is the question that Mayor Davie desires
answered. In support of his claim that
the people should own all institutions that
are absolutely necessary to modern civili-
zation Mayor Dayie is searching the
municipal records of large British and
continental cities. He is convinced that
municipal ownership is the basis of good
government and that any city that owns
the plants referred to will be practically
exempt from taxation.
How are we to start if we do not issue
bonds?" asked Mayor Davie. "If all these
big companies and corporations can make
vast fortunes for their owners the munic-
ipality would surely do the same. But
that is not what / am getting at. | find
that in cities where the people own the
gas plants that the rates have been re-
duced nearly one-half. The water rates IN
other cities show the same results. In
London the streetcar franchises are so
granted that when they expire at the end
of fifty years the city has the option of
purchase at figure to be fixed by arbltra-
tion. What will these streetcar franchises
be worth in forty years time when houses
line the tracks on both sides2
Nov is the best time for the city to ac-
quire q water plant. But money is re-
quired to do it, and how is it to be raised
if not by issuing bonds?
81 see by local paper this morning that
Auditor Snow makes some mean insinua-
tions and seeks to throw a false shade over
my position in very clever way. He
concludes: 1T costs money to govern a
city, and lots OF it. 1t takes brains as
well. The citizens must furnish both.
Scarcity of either is a costly thing in gov
ernment. Mr.. Snow is right, absolutely,
although l do not appreciate the trend of
of his remarks. His remarks on the en-
gine-houses, wharves and streets are non
sense and untrue. If they are in wrecked
condition it surely cannot be the result, as
he says, of the first six months of our
financial administration.
"a new City Hall is an absolute neces-
sity. This twenty -year-old harm is not
fit for city of 60, 600 people, and is totals
inaduquate for the city's government. Mr..
Snow says that there should be tax levy
that would include fund for building q
garbage crematory. That is nonsense, as
the crematory item was eliminated before
the tax levy was sent to me. Then, again,
why should the city build a crematory
when there is an offer of $50 before the
Council for the privilege of collecting the
garbage and disposing of it2 However,
these things trouble me very little, as the
mark of the cloven hoof is too plain"