The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1898-02-05
MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP.

to the extent of passing resolution pro-
yiding for a committee to consider the
municipal ownership Of the electric
lighting business the aldermen promptly
rejected the proposition, thus evidenciug
| its purpose TO not waste the city's time by
engaging in any frivolous speculation of
this sort at least
While the subject Of municipal light
| ing is thus hardly to be live issue dur
| ing the present administration. its call
ing up in even frivolous way is re-
mindsr that Mayor Baker felt bound TO
recommend Ii in his inaugural message,
and unconsciously presented very potent
argument why the municipality should
| hesitate to embark in such an enterprise.
| The Mayor showed 60 his own satisfac-
tion, to DO sure. that the city would
make q crafty ing saving by investing
monsy-w hich would, of course. have to
| be borrowed lin the establishment OF an
electric lighting plant But II he saw
any significance in his remarks as to the
water works plant. as applying to sim
| liar municipal venture In electric light
| ing, he failed to make il manifest in his
message
Gratifying as has been the results from
municipal ownership OF the water works.
| one factor thereof indicates strongly that
all is not rose colorsd III such owne rship.
| The Mayor discovered, for instance, ne
to our city water works, that during the
period OF their construction "the cost Of
labor and material was a great deal more
than it Is today" and actually, as q
plain business fact, without any senti-
ment to relieve II, "by reason OF depreci-
alton and reduced cost OF the work. the
estimated value OF the water works TO-
day is less than the bonded indebtedness. -
This is the other side OF the shield.
4
! private corporation would although 1t il
mighty poor water, but, 10 tho city has
lost money on its plant, which would
not now bring what the taxpayers must
pay for IL when the bonds are redeemed.
In other words, we enjoy low water rates
but are taxed for the difference between
them and what private corporation
would DO compelled 10 charge to live.
Tho advocates of municipal ownership
usually lose sight OF the condition thus
Indicated and the Mayor IN stating this
fact OF the water works plant quite con.
founded his own argument in favor of q
municipal electric lighting plant.
For II is safe to say that did the city sci
up an electric lighting plant today the
property would be available only for the
junk hemp long before IL was paid for. by
contrast TO municipal plants that have
elsewhere been established that of the
Narragansett Electric Lighting Company
is a striking example. frequently noted,
| Of how private corporation will keep Its
property up-to-date and furnish the high
| est possible product, as 1t Is bound to do,
where, under municipal ownership dets
rioration is more rapid than bond pay
ments aud tho citizens are left to get
what comfort they can from poor light at
prices that will not meet the cost OF pro-
duction and the possibility oi wiplng out
Of the property at loss. AS general
principle IL appears to be clear, demon
strated In practice. II not strictly In ac-
cordance with theory. that municipal
ownership oannot do business any more
oheaply or any better than private owner
ship although the proposition mny fool
people for time. And tho electrical
matters, particularly the developments.
are so rapid that the folly OF setting MP
municipal plant for product like electric
lighting would be rs foolish an act as
could well be conceived.
And. by the way, Mr.. Mayor, and frivo.
lous gentlemen OF the Council, II you
yearn for municipal ownership of the
electric lighting business. why not mu-
nicipal gas works as well9
Bunch 'em all together, gentlemen,
and throw In the dream OF the Hon. Sam
Bullock OF public market while you are
about it. The last has at least q modi.
cum OF reasonableness.