The Seattle Republican. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1???-1915, 1900-03-09
GOVERNOR PINGREE
Explains Municipal Ownership
From the Way He Under
lands It Not a Bad
Thing.
(Hazen S. Pingree. }

(Hazen ,. Plngree.)
Concerning what municipal
ownership is and means miscon-
ception has gradually taken pos
session Of people because of the
day-by-day steady presentation by
biased newspapers and others Of
incorrect facts and illogical argu-
ment. Seek the motive Of those
who oppose municipal ownership
and you will almost invariably find
that it is self-interest.
In the first place, municipal
ownership is not a new thing.
There are more than 300 varieties
of undertaking and businesses now
engaged in by governments.
Among these are schools, parks,
streets, bridges, waterwork S.
libraries, museums, armies, navies,
postofices, lighting plants, etc.
One by one the government has
been assuming the ownership and
control of these public utilities.
Little complaint has been heard
because it has done so. The re-
suits Of government ownership
have proved so satisfactory to the
people that there has been abso-
lutely no demand for return to
private ownership.
1t is equally apparent that
municipal ownership of street
railways will be the next move
ment demanding public attention.
The first objection is that city
governments should not engage in
businesses which properly belong
to the domain Of private enter
prise. Socialism is the inevitable
ultimate outcome Of municipal
ownership. This is one Of the
principal objections urged against
municipal ownership of street rail-
ways. It had its origin, Of course,
in the offices Of private street rail
way corporations and other natural
monopoly corporations.
But the most powerful and
effective opposition, by word and
deed, to municipal ownership Of
public utilities comes from that
large class of people who cater to
the capitalists-who follow them
blindly-who seek to curry favor
with them for financial and social
reasons who initiate them, or, to
speak more plainly, and perhaps
in not elegant terms the "toadies. :"
Probably the objection to NUM-
cipal ownership most frequently
urged is that it would tend to
greater corruption in city govern
ment. Our city governments are
suffering from various ills, boss
plague, ring rule, and corruption
in common councils being among
them. But these evils exist be-
cause Of the indifference of the
people. The only way to cure
these ills is to rouse the people to
the appreciation of their obIiga-
tions as citizens, Not until then
will the cause be removed. II the
people are given the right to own
and operate public utilities you
will find regard for their own
pocketbooks will be the most
effective preventive Of corruption
IN city government.
A third objection is that rail
ways cannot be managed as econo-
mically as under priva owner
ship, where the incentive to econo-
mical management is so much
greater because Of the opportunity
for private profit. This objection
is absolutely without foundation.
The history of municipal water
works and lighting plants proves,
beyond contradiction, that the
cost to the consumer is much less
under public ownership.
While there have been no actual
trials of municipal ownership Of
street railways in this country,
there is a powerful and growing
public sentiment in favor of it.
Whenever the people have been
given an opportunity to express
their opinions upon the question
they have voted overwhelmingly
| for municipal ownership.