The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1900-01-28
plNGREE-YERKES DEBATE.
OvE>TTOy or MY ICfPAL o"NEh
NHIp DISCUSSED NJ THEN.
Pingre- Declares That Municipal o"h"r-
ship Of Public utiIit''s IL Necessary
MIR. Ycrk.s sass hat the Be.t Results
Ar, secured by Private Ownership

Pingrr~ Declares That Nuhi''p"' """
ship Of Public UtiIiti's IL NecessaIJ
-yr. Yrrk.s sass That the Be-t hesuits
Ar, secured by Private Own"rship'
CHICAGO. Jan. 27-Gov. Hazsn y. Flngree OF
Nlchignn and Charles 7. Yerkes debated the
pulIcr' of municipal ovnershl . to-niRht at 'ho
Marquette Cub The foremost advocate 10
America Of the municipal ownership OF street
ri'wuys crossed swords with the most succHss'
fuI exroncnt OF the private ownership OF street.
railways. Prof J, Lawrence LauGhIin OF the
University OF Chicago also spoSe on 'he SUP
lrct. The occasion was the regular inonthIy
dinner and DISCUSSION OF the Marquette Club,
GOV. pinxree, who was the first speaker.
aiy0caLed tins municipal operation Of all pubnc
utilities Prof. Laughlin, who followed. noui'-
ma. IS nok a middle position. Hesald thht the
teachings ~ political ec"nomy 40 not warrant
extremes OF either governmental or private
ownership. His conclusions. however. were
rather In favor Of municipal control. Mr..
Yerks. who wa, last to speak defended the prl-
vate owner.
Gov, rngree said:
"A misconcrrtion oi what municipal owner
ship IA and means has gradually taken possess
sion OF people because OF the day by day STEADY
preseu'ution by Kissed newspapers and others
o. incorrect facts and Illogical arguments.
Seek the motives Of those who oppose munl-
cipal ownership and you will almost Invariably
And that Il IL -eli-interest. On the o'her hand,
there is no way in which advocates OF NUM-
opal ownership can profit by the success oil the
movement. The benefits accrue to the ontlre
pe%opls-not to q privileged few"
Municipal ownership is not a new Trims
The principle involved In Il Ia almost as cd as
lnp,n.rutI Il, M 81 I'M nnf taplf There ARE more
than three hundred varieties OF uhder'hklhI
aud businesses now engaged ~ by govern
msn,s; Among these are schoo'I, rsdss .
museums. armies. na'les., toNt nllcrs, llgnt-
Ing tlants, None of them II now regarded as
r." especial R]royinss OF mI .rly Sae f. .rn a.som.
ing the ownership and control ~ these puplc
utilities. Very lttla com liant has been heard
bee use N has dove 40.
The results OF Government ownership have
proved 50 sa, ~siactory to the people that there
las been absoIutrly no d.elnahd Tor the return
to ~, yate ownership Yet there ~ Absolutely
no IN, renee in principle be'wcen public
owner hip and operation OF the fost once
sey, IA! generations ago an, pubIc ownership
tween public ownership Of streets at the time
oil tn establishm. nt OF our government ani
municipal ownership o: street railways now. y
He urged that the principle bc extended to
arrly to III means Of transportation and COM
munication
SIR. lerkes said:
1t - VIII : me tTeNllhIlNn l Ineet me grfdt
adyocutes o. municipal control in a pubic dis
cusslOn. Thv 'sct thai they have given tho
suh.oct years. Of study md that one, o. hem
hbsrNpounird Il before thousands Of reop.e
und from perhaps hundreds oil Platforms.
cautions me that thay are 10 o%rdinarr oIpo-
nrnt~. al that | must re careful 70 give you
my points cloiry and understandings anu
with such evidence AS Ia at my control.
II vi not calm Tint my oppos ton TO NUM-
cipnl ownership IS because OF my great owe ,or
the ueopla. nor that my HE Is entirely devoted
60 fhnir | .npff At the same time | VIII claim
that | ha "a kindly feeling for my teilowman
aud that ! desire his Advancement ami I'M
I'm listening to ons Of our spcakers. | under
stood I'm ~ say that the operation OF schools;
PARKS. streets. bridges, museums, arm "s and
ownership and that the resu IS Of govern.
msnt owner-hip have been most Satisfactory
This IL m entl rely new idea 10 me, That the
term 'iunicipal ownership should he applled
TO z public -choul. park. bridge or museum. is
indeed move. particularly as they are sup.
ported from taxes, Ut 20 include n the LIST
nrnics and nayIes IL n "st remarkable.
These items are meic ~tallacles Brought into
the argument for he purpose Of Assisting in
debating on the really important items. name
Lighting and street railTo 'ds Government
control OF these corporations II what Is more
partlcu lurly pointed out than any other; There
can be. no doubt in the unbiased mind
largo community were run by the
government. whrtherit be municipal or other
Wise, tntt "a great IbllllCbl HlttIllt Wpuu wv
formed. an mat 1t would almost b. an impos-
slbility to disrupt that machine, The number
of people who would he suhservlent 10 the
leaders would be only estimated by the courage
for iniquity that would be contained In the
minds o. these lenders.
"Tho merit system, II fairly establ shed.
would give to sOme extent IN Intelligence in
the operating departments, hut we all know,
particularly in Chicago. that civil service rs.
form = practically a myth, The tendency OF
municipal politics toward robbery. place
trading and absolute dishonesty is not 20 be
denied, Tut even were the civil service laws
properly enforced and the merit system
firmly established. the service would be
simply impossible for any industry TO. be car
ripd ON successfully without its head being an
INTEL gent, aud experienced, person. free from
an political affiliations IN selecting or nominate
te rested in the success Of said Industry.
1T has been said here that there Is no dan
ger OF this spirit of municipal control extend
ing beyond certain enterprises where the poo
keynotr Of III. situation Is struck by Mr.: Pnb-
ert p. Porter In hts address before the Massa-
chuserts Committee where he saws: There Ia
euch q thing as carrying government .lnterier-
enca too far. and the dau ger In all such expert
men's arlses rom tho Tact that one step leads
TO another
1.-THE conscrv tive advocates claim that al they
desire ~ to have the municipality " rs water
works. gas aud electric light plants and street
railways But II we consider such q, coalition,
Departments and the grent ruler OF the muni-
cipality branching ont with his Legislative
BODY. giving himself and his cohorts the rights
TO extend their domain into all other kinds OF
husinrss?'
Mr.. Ycrkes denied that municipal ownership
hnd been "A success wherever tried .as had been
asserted by GOV. Ping ee. and cited numerous
instances to prove MS assertion.