The Advocate and news., 1898-01-26
RIPLEY ON GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP
President Of the Santa Fe Writes An Open
Letter on the Subject,

Letter on the Subject.
President Ripley, Of the A., T. & s. F.,
has sent a letter to the Kansas Com
moner in which he answers John Davis
regarding the government ownership OF
railroads. Mr.. Ripley says in part:
Firstly-There is grave doubt whether
the government has the legal right TO,
or could obtain ownership OF the lines
for the purpose Of operating them. 1t Is
not question which either Mr.. Davis or
myself is capable of passing on. 1t can
Cnly be settled by the best legal talent
and the highest courts In the land 1t Is
enough that the doubt exists; and there is
another still more formidable question as
10 whether the Federal government after
II had got possession OF the lines could
operate them inside the limits OF the sew
lawyers to settle, but the best opinion
seems to be that before It could be done
radical changes would have to be made
in our constitution and in our whole pres
ent fabric OF the relations Of State and
national authorities But OF all this l
am incompetent to speak with authority.
Secondly-Whatever may be said about
''forfelting charters and so forth, there
is only one way in which the government
could come into possession Of the rail-
way properties, viz, by purchase at
reasonable price. | am not now talking
about the capitalization OF the railways
-
1t is excessive l am talking Of a rea-
sOnable cash value for the properties
themselves. That has been vaTlOusly es-
timated to be anywhere from 5000 ,0OO,O 600
to Sl5,0O0,O 900 900. Probably 1t would be
somewhere between the two. Supposng
ii was the lowest hgure-slX billions of
dollars-that amount Is five times the en-
tire national debt of the United States
to-day. We know that there have been
some embarrassments about the govern
ment floating bonds for hundred mill
lion or So The government probably
could borrow six thousand millions; but
1t would be unpleasant to have to do 1t.
Moreover, interest on the borrowed amount
at per cent. would be $1S0,O00,000 year
1t is easy to talk Of the government CIV
ing better service, employing more men,
lowering rates and still making money
AS matter Of fact, government operation
or management Of anything never was,
will be or can be, as economical as pri-
vate management; and to earn the in
terest the government would have to do
one of three things: (a) increase the rates
very probably to the level Of the rates
on the government owned lines of Aus
tTalia-which would not be pleasant for
the people; (b) cheaper the service, en-
ploy fewer men and let things generally
set into disrepair which Is what was
done on the government owned lines Of
Italy, and would be still more unpleas-
ant for the people, or (c) face an annual
deficit and rely on taxation to make up
ment owned lines In India-which would
he most unpleasant Of all.
In this connection let me call attention
to the report of the House committee
on postal affairs which appears in the
press dispatches of to-day January 81,
which comments on the unbusinesslike
administration Of the postoftice department
and expresses the opinion that the work
of the postOffice department could be bet
ter and more cheaply done by private
enterprise.
Thirdly-The most serious considerations
are the political ones. There are about
$4,000 railway employees in the United
States. Under government ownership each
of these would be political appOintee.
1t Is certain that the application OF poll
tics to the railway service would lower
the character of the service, but still more
appalling is the tremendous political SUE
premaCy which those $4,000 offices would
give to the party in power. In Kansas
there would be about 5000 otticeholders
more than there are now to support the
administration.
Worse still would be the political re-
suits of the contracts for construction of
new lines, etc. The scandals and jobbery
Of the tariff bill would be nothing com
pared to the field which would be opened
to the spoilsmen by the railways. II two
towns In Kansas wanted a railway built,
their getting 1t would depend entirely on
the political pull of their representatives
at Washington. Districts or States Of a
political complexion opposed to that of
the party i'm power would have to wait
Till the crack Of doom for any new lines;
and in districts where the friends Of the
administration came from there would be
lines as thick as stripes on O. cats back.
If there were nothing else to be said
against government ownership, the polit
iCal argument alone would be enough to
condemn 1t fOrever-Or at least until our
politics and government were run on en-
tirely different principles from what they
are now or until the American people
were converted into race Of angels. But
there is much more to be said, and we
shall see.
Fourthly-JOhn Stuart Mill was a very
much smarter man than either Mr.. Davis
or ], and he once said: 1.-THE inferiOrity OF
government agency in any Of the common
operations of industry or commerce Is
proved by the fact that It is hardly ever
able to maintain itself in equal cOmpe-
tition with individual agency" Even in
the absence Of any experience we should
expect government operation Of railways
4.