The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-02-25

New York, Feb 25.--At the National
Convention Of Municipal Ownerships and
Public Franchises here to-day Robert +.
Porter spoke on European and Ameri-
can Methods and Results Compared
He said in part: >, ... =. .
Mrs. Porter Is Opposed 49,.
1.-The establishment Of enormous bu-
reaucracies and the creation of a privil-
eyed class of employees constitute men
ace to the public veal. Reflect for Il
moment what an organization like Tam
many would become it, in addition to
the present force Of officials, an army
Of industrial employees should be added, !
Besides the numerous industries at
present being raSried on by British mu-
inequalities, we fnd ameng the powers
applied for ,are4thss manufacture of steam
engines dynamos, gas and electric fittings
paving materials, cod-air storage, ice
making, concert rooms, milk supply, cycle
tracks, etc. Tramcar factories have been
established. municipal telephonesSsare be-
ing undertaken and municipal banks and
bank notes, pawn-broking, bakeries and
public houses have been suggested
In America we find that the time and
ability of those willing to take part IN
such work fully. absorbed in performing
the regular functions of municipal gov
eminent. They have not yet entered into,
trade When one realizes how strong is
the temptation to jobbery under existing
conditions, it is perhaps, fortunate. Tor
limit, together with the American dis
like for paternal government has Kept
our municipalities from venturlng FAR
along the dangerous pathway OF municipal
| socialism.
| ."rhe tramways of the United Kingdom
are about equally divided between the
local authorities and companies, the for
of i1onc mr.
latter about $50. With a few exceptions
these tramways are not compa rable, either
in equipment or service, with the 2o.ooo
! or more miles developed in the United
States by private enterprise. Inc united
Kingdom should have had by tins tlme
| 4, 600 or 5000 miles Of first-class electrlc
RAILWAYS. and it would have had this mile
ago had Sit not been for the sitting effect
| of municipal trading. 49,
/ ."rwo cities owned telephone undertak-
fings or did, for Tunbridge Wells, mas soid
! its system to the National Ielepnone com
parry. Several million sterling nave oeen
invested in vast schemes for housing the
working asses. much of. which has pro-
duced more harm than good. Inc ms
tory of the gas industry in England, the
housing of the working classes ana the
Telephone industry, is almost the same as
the history of street railways:
During the last few years mos W >,
;
have been exploded. There is no proof
that the consumer is especially benehted:
The service is equally good In the Onlted
States under private enterprise ana inc
cost relative to the cost OF labor ana OF
raw material no more. AS mas peer,
said by Mr.. Davies before the Society OF
i Arts. so far from municipal enterprises
haino check on the evil Of trusts, II
n1i11 nnon examination be found to eX.
nose the consumer to all the oppressive
conditions of the American combine.
Private Ownership "ImmoraP'
}. Clinton Rogers Woodruff of Pl1iladel
mia, opened the discussion OF recent his
Itory of municipal ownership in the United
states. Mr. Woodruff said In part:
.swhati sthe cause of the undenlab BILE
growth of popular interest in the munlc-
inal ownership of public service fran
chises? l reply that the movement IL
; primarily due to theh popular lnd1gna'
t ton felt at the corruptness and degrada'
ton incident to the policy OF private own
ership The people are awakening to al
annreciation Of the dangers lurking in thu
:, shadows of such relationships as nov
:. exist between city governments and pr
, yate corporations. There is an ethlca
reaction against such practice as l hay
briefly mentioned an dit Is nlanlfest1ng It
self in a demand for municipal owner
4 ship.
.As vet l doubt whether there is an,
very general feeling on the essential i'm
i propriety and immortality of policy Whc
. lpermits private concerns to enjoy publ
K privileges for their private profit.
I what inherent right has any individual
/ to become rich through the grant of,
I municipal franchise or privilege.
!: Il have used the term municipal owner
i !, ship throughout my remarks as distin
n guished from private ownership. I hay
!. not used it to include or imply municipa
operation That is another question, be
cause for some time to come in mos
places we will have to utilize private con
!. Germs and their. experience and bushes
= capacity but only as agents and not a
: PRINCIPALS. In other words the compen
{ sation of private concerns must be lin
+ tied to fair return for the service
rendered and no more.
u Mr.. Donald Favors It
Robert Donald spoke on "Munteip