The Springfield herald., 1906-01-19
DUNNE| IN DENVER
MAYOR OF CHICAGO TALKS ON
MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP.
OUR COUNTRY LAGs BEHIND
Tells What He Saw in Europe-Thinss
Managed Better There-Descanto
on the Tyranny of MonopoIies.

OF INC ' tyranny OF monopolIeo.
Denver.-Mayor Edward f. Dunno OF
| Chicago arrived in Denver Thursday
and met cordial reception, such as
| has seldom been accorded to visiting
officials. At night he addressed a
large audience at the Woman's Club,
the hall being crowded to its utmost
capacity. His address was, in part, as
follows:
In the year 1900, while on visit
to Europe, | sent a telegram from In
terlaken to Lucerne, in Switzerland. II
cost me somewhere about cents in
American money. | was astounded at
the smallness of the charge, and upon
making inquiry discovered that the tel
egraph system of Switzerland was in
the hands of the government and oper-
ated by it. This started me upon u
train of thought and investigation. If
publicly owned telegraph system in
Switzerland could be operated at such
prices. why should not the United
States be able to do likewise?
Upon pursuing my investigations l
discovered that every civilized country
upon earth except three, Honduras.
Costa Rica-if memory serves me
right-and the United States, owned
and operated their own telegraph sys-
tens. l further discovered that not
only We're the telegraph systems of the
world being operated as public utilities
in public hands. but that in many coun-
tries the railroads, street car systems,
electric light systems, gas systems. wa,
ter systems and telephone systems
were being operated by the public, and
/ yound that there was a reason why
Il, l. To-,
stead OF private hands.
When one seeks to do business with
his butcher, his grocer. his dry goods
merchant his doctor, his lawyer or his
plumber, he stands at arms length and
has the right to make free and vol
untary contract. If the character of
the goods that he seeks to purchase is
not satisfactory or the price is unrea-
sonable he may go elsewhere. He is
not bound to deal with any one person
or corporation in the purchase of such
necessities of life. But when he comes
TO utilize the telegraph, the telephone.
the street car, the steam railway, or to
purchase gas or electric light he finds
himself deprived of the right of free
contract. He must take such service
as is offered him and pay the price de-
manded.
IL HIS SdS Is OIL ueuClclt uudllty Dl
the price is too high. he must either
pay his bill or have his meter jerked
out. If his telephone service is unsat
isfactory or the price unreasonable he
must stand and deliver or have his
telephone wires cut. Ii he objects to
the service given him upon street
car or the price charged he must either
pay or be thrown off. In other words
in dealing with public utility compa-
MES and in purchasing from them
these latter-day necessaries of life, he
is deprived of the right of free CON
tract and must take such service as is
offered and pay the price demanded.
He is face to face with monopoly
and individual protest or objection as
against such a monopoly is absolutely
unavailable.
These monopolies in privte hands
as most of them are in this country
are conducted for the private gain of
the stockholders. The aim of the man
agement is to make money-to give as
little service for as high a price as can
be eXacted from the community. The
very fact that in this country public
utilities have been and still are in pri-
vate hands has given rise, to serious
abuses-overcrowded street cars, I'M
and deficient service.
In the case of gas, telephone and
electric light companies we have ex-
cessive charges. unsatisfactory service
and insolence on the part of the Off
GERS and agents of the companies when
complaint is made either as to price
or the character of service.
This state of affairs has brought
about in many cities of the United
States growing dissatisfaction on
the part of the public. and this dis,
satisfaction has developed into an agi-
tation in favor of the ownership and
operation of these utilities by the pub
lie That agitation has grown with
tremendous strength within the last
few years, and to-day, throughout the
cities of the United States, we are
face to face with the question as to
whether municipal ownership of public
utilities must be put into force to rem
edy the evils of private management.
Strange to say. this country, which
has been in the vanguard of progress
in all other matters, has been among
the last among the civilized countries
of the world to take up and seriously
discuss this question.
On February IS, 1904, as is shown by
the report of the American consul. 142
cities of Great Britain owned and op-
Grated their own street car systems.
That number has been largely in
creased since then, and to-day there
are twenty-four more cities now con
structing municipal street railways.
In Great Britain and Ireland 2S2 cities
now own and operate their own gas
works. In the same countries 33i
cities and towns are operating their
own electric light systems, leaving
only IVA in that kingdom which are
privately owned. A great number of
British cities are owning and operating
their own telephone systems ana
within the last few months the gov
ernment of Great Britain made large
appropriation for the taking over bV
the general government of the tele-
phone systems of the kingdom.