The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-08-27
THE POLICY or SHAM.
rhe Municipal Ownership Issue tn THIS
Town.

inc MunlCJpAI VWucTbhp sss~ 81"
Town.
TO THE EDITOR or The SuN-Sr: ~ 10
q rather strange coincidence that on the
very morning that THE Sun announces
that Mr.. Odell declared for fusion, Win
municipal ownership as q campaign cry,
there should come to my hands d oopS
of the platform OF the Socialistio party,
which made It's nominations for o Iocai
ticket In Canton. Ohio. OH the night OF aug
IS. Permit me to quote the following iToh'
the Socialist platform:
First: Municipal ownership and operation OF
street railways. gas and electric lighting. power
and heating plants. telephones and such o'heI
necessities a. are used 10 nx the public for prvale
pront-such operation TO be solely for the purpose
Of decreasing the cost 70 the consumer, Increasing
the efficiency OF the service and bcttering the con
dition OF the employees.
The platform then, In subdivisions that
are marked a." B" and &C." &C.. further
provides for "the extension OF public WORKS
to relieve the unemployed. and still an
other subdivision provides for the puLo =
ing by the municipality Of homes Tor worx-
ing people, to rent Ut cost. Ihen the 90
ciallstic platform says:
We warn the workers against municipal owner
ship under capitalistc parties. The Income from
public utilities would then 90 to pay interest on
bonds and 70 decrease taxation. The workers
would still be exploited. whether under private
ownership tweedledum or public ownership twee-
dledee. The capitallstic class would control, not
the working class; and the captalstic class would
reap the main benent. not the working class IN
der the capltalstic parties. municipal ownership
would be q sop thrown 10 working men 70 Keep
them quiet. under the Socialist party municipal
ownership would be a step toward Socialism.
In the resolutions adopted at the meet
lngs Of the executive bodies OF the Hepub-
4 nsx.tt "a ar a
as published in this mornings SUN. 1t says:
IT Is the purpose OF the Republican party 70 e.
feet such fusion and TO give It's full power In the
coming election in the support OF candidates pledged
to an administration OF the Affairs OF this city I'm
der which the public utility corporations Will not
be the masters Of the people OF this city.
1t is worth while remembering that when
the Hon. Tim Sullivan returned from Eu-
rope, a few days ago, the Congressman
from the Bowery, probably after much
thought, anyway after q study OF munic-
ipal ownership abroad. said that with
municipal ownership here In New YORK
Tammany Hall would remain In power for
q period OF $50 years at least.
While in some instances 1t IL made TO ap-
pear that municipal ownership has been .
success. still think You will agree with the
writer that In the vast majority Of the towns
and cities where it has and is now being
tried IN tnlB country muulclpdl OWueTsnip
has been a failure.
In conversation to-day with a proml-
ncn. politician. a Republican at that. the
latter unhesitatingly said that while the
municipal ownership issue will probably be
the one on which his party would have the
calcium light turn most prominently. still
at the same time, he said. those who would
vote for municipal ownership would do 80
with little or no understanding Of what II
really means. He went even further and
said that with that plank In the platform
the fusion ticket would be elected this fall.
but added "Of course. while the Repub-
lican platform would promise municipal
ownership, the pro mise could not be made
good, and any one knows there is not town
or city in this country that would purchase
and control all the public utility plants that
would not become bankrupt"
Under these circumstances, and with all
the lessons that have gone before, Is it wise
for party to go before the voters at this time
with the municipal ownership bueaboo2
NEW YORK. Aug. 20. ASUN READER.