Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1899-09-20

puDllC must expect 10 lose. III the CdSe
of water and light, the tax levy for fire
protection and lighting purposes is usu-
ally higher where private company
controls the industry. because a private
company must have personal profit
out of this service, while lie these public
needs are supplied by the public no
profit is demanded. Under private own
Iership the corporations owning these
services take an abnormal interest as to
who should serve the public. Brides are
offered, and sometimes taken. Jobbing
of watered stock, water that never runs
through the mains, is the usual method
OF reducing dividends, and thereby Of
fering an excuse for rates for service
that many times exceed the actual cost
of honest service. But rather than con-
slider the many and apparent disadvan-
tages Of private ownership as a part OF
this question the opponents of munich
pal ownership employ their energies IN
creating unreasonable restrictions, the
compliance with which they insist is
absolutely necessary for the sue
cess of pubic ownership some
| of these friends of private.
Ownership say that all money taken
| from the taxpayers for investment IN
municipality owned industries is con-
| fiscated If this proposition is true IL
| Is certainly valid objection to munlcl-
| pal ownership, because any policy that
confiscates property without It's return
4 OF it's equal in value is dangerous ana
unjust Upon it's face it seems a true
|conclusion based upon facts. BY LOOK
ling INTO the subject we find that IL is
not true in any sense. The same money
! that a city is obliged to pay a private
corporation for hydrant rental or street
lights, If invested in a municipal plant
will in a few years pay for the plant, al
i the same time giving the citizens equal
4 service with private corporation, ana
4 when the plant Is paid Tor, hydrant
4 renting and enormous cost OF street
lighting will be thing of the past, and
4 Instead Of paying out large sums of
money for these services the city VIII
Il actually receive a net revenue from
1.-The plants. If two propositions were
4 presented to you under which you
would be obliged In either case to pay
4 s., 900 per annum for given service,
Il but under one proposition the obllga-
u ton ceases after twenty-five years and
4 you would have property worth every
4 cent invested, and under the other the
4 obligation would never cease and you
1 would never have any property, IT
would not take you long to decide
! which proposition to choose. Does IT
. not seem to you that your money un-
der the proposition where you received
no return was confiscated? Certainly,
and so with private and municipal
ownership the confiscation comes I'M
der private ownership. Under munich
!, pal ownership it is not case OF con-
fiscation, but pure business invest
b ment If the proposition from bust
: mess standpoint is a sound one, no cry
of .confiscation should prevent its
adoption.
They tell US that municipal owner
.iship cannot be made a success without
; provision for sinking fund with which
d to pay the bonds of the industry
: Under municipal ownership there is nj
: necessity for paying bonds SO long a!
. the amount of bonds outstanding
against the works is reasonable in com
y parison with the value of the industry
:. : Any large industry. whether private o
9 lpublic, will carry reasonable amour
!. Of bonded debt and in the case of boti
: water and light plants the natural in
. crease of the industries will secure thu
!. Investments With 80 per cent of tn,
" business of the country done on credit
such an argument has no especial ter
, rors.
:. = ut is claimed municipal ownership
: will fall because cities do not keel
:, their books in just the manner thes'
:, gentlemen would wish, and because thu
expense fund is not kept separate from
J, the improvement fund. If the rates TO
service are low and the taxes are rea
!, sonable the people will not demand
: certain system of bookkeeping. |
: the water is clear and the street light
3 burn brightly all night the people vii
. not care even if the expense fund am
4 the Improvement fund are both en-
6 tered in the same column. 1t will b
n hard to convince the boards of alder
o men and the mayors that they are in
\ Icompetent to decide these questions. o
3. if they do decide them that they will b
n decided in corruption. After all, thi
# is a pure question of book-keepin
II which expert accountants can easil
" solve On these and like argument
II and on clever theories created to con
1t fuse are based the arguments of tn
all theoretical opponents of municipa
1T ownership. They use words instead Q
,e facts, phrases instead of figures. the
1T tories instead of conditions and conclu
1t sions instead of results.
If 1T Is a favorite assumption Of thes
I'd gentlemen that an investigation of thi
ar question, to be of any value, must b
I'd made by some commission, economis
or technical expert--some commissio
%, like the department of labor of tn
I'd United States, which has been carry
8 ing on an investigation for severe
IT years at great expense. and froi
err which we have no immediate prospec
IN of report; some student of economic
o. brilliant and we'll read, but who doe
al not know a dynamo from voltmete
c. or a gate valve from water pump
some technically educated expert
s. technically educated while in the en-
al ploy OF some great corporation and az
es quiring his expert qualifications
i manipulating the affairs of some con
X, pany in order to get every dollar pc:
ne sible out of the taxpayers They a.
&c sumo that the average city official
ne not competent to investigate in
o. logical manner this question. And
MS may be remarked that city officials wi
ai look with great deal of distrust upo
ne the disinterested efforts of these gel
II tlemen to enlighten them as to the
We duty so long as their efforts are base
re upon the theory that municipal owne