Waterbury evening Democrat., 1906-09-12

: vice corporations in endeayoring tt secure and retain special privilegel for themselves. But he thinks of | and he knows too that while 1t ma, not be always either possible ol wise to operate public corporation , with the same strictness and econ omy which is practical in private one, nevertheless the chief end 1T view will be to give fair public ser vice at reasonable rates and not tc curtail the service to minimum tc pay large dividends or to float water. ] ed stock.
 All these things make us incline
 toward some measure of state or mu.
 nicipal control. It Is rapidly grow.
 ing sentiment. l must confess that did not believe in 1t five years ago
 but bitter constraint and sad oc-
 caSion drear" in other words, ex.
 perience, has changed my views and
 think the same Is true of great
 many citizens of Connecticut.
 l 1 believe that the time has come
 when the democratic party of Con
 necticut should take firm ground
 upon this question, not because 1t is,
 for the moment, popular, but be-
 cause 1t is everlastingly right.
 How far this policy should be ex- tended is in every case question
 of expediency. In some instances,
 like water supply and lighting in the
 cities 1t is likely that municipal op-
 eration Is the best solution of the
 difficulty. In other fields a wise reg
 ulation by the state having a due
 regard both for the rights of capital
 and for the public service, is per
 haps all that is necessary There is
 no inflexible rule that can be applied
 to every case, but the general policy
 of the future is apt to be toward a
 curbing of the unlimited powers
 given by the state to corporations I dealing in the public necessities. I To this end the position of our party
 ought to be made clear along several
 specific lines, and among other
 things we should urge:
 The repeal of the act requiring
 municipalities proposing to enter the field of lighting, to buy out all ex- isting companies. There is no more
 reason for a statute of this nature q
 would be groceryman to buy out all existing grocery stores. None of our lighting companies have ex- elusive franchises as far as l know, nor is it proper that they should have.
 The repeal of the act requiring a finding of public convenience and necessity before any independent telephone company can occupy or in any way utilize any of the public highways. This statute in its pres ent form makes any competition in this field impracticable in Connecti- cut and 1t was probably passed for that very purpose.
 The establishment of a gas and electric lighting commission, similar to those of other states, with power, subject to constitutional provisions, to regulate the price of gas and cleo tricity.
 The repeal of such portions of the street railway law as give to the railroad commissioners control of the public streets of any incorporat- 1 ed city.
 A constitutional amendment for bidding the granting of public utility | franchises, in perpetuity without any compensation therefor.
 Eighty-Cent Gas Law.
 These propositions may sound rad ical, and for Connecticut perhaps | they are. In most of the other states | of the Union they would appear as | conservative enough. Witness the action of the state of New York in | passing an eighty cent<gas order, of | the city of New oYrk in granting a franchise to build and operate sub ways on condition that they become city property after a term of years, of the state of Massachusetts in re- fusing to allow the New York, New Haven & Hartford railroad to ec- quire and hold the electric lines which parallel the steam road, thus stifling competition. Such exercise of the powers Of government would be almost revolutionary in Connecti- cut.
 Of the many other features of the state policy carried out by the repub- lican party, the time is too short to speak except in the briefest possible way. They are as live issues as they ever were and they will remain such, for they are based on the inherent love of every American for Justice. equality and fair play and they never will be settled until they are settled right.
 The present system of representa- tion in the lower house, based on township lines and ignoring popula- tion altogether is indefensible except on the theory that they should keep who have the power. Indeed, it is hardly ever defended on any other ground. Clearly 1t is not right that less than one-ninth of the people of the state should elect majority of the house of representatives. It is the most perfect example of the rot ten borough system to be found under the American flag and is a shame and a disgrace to the state.
 No one can say that it Is fair that New Haven. Hartford, Bridgeport, and Waterbury with a popuation of 50.0Uv, a third of the entire com should elect only eight out of total of 255. We owe 1t to the honor of our state , to keep up this agitation for repre- reform until something is This inequality in re- is a cause of many of the evils we complain of. Were the cities represented at Hartford in a at all corresponding to their wealth and population, had. they more to say concerning the pass , lge of the statutes directly affecting 1, them. many of the acts we complain )f would never have been passed