The Republican journal., 1907-03-07
MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP.

ship is the title of a book by Robert
P. Porter recently published by The
Century Company. Mr. Porter is
Journalist and student of trading con-
ditions in foreign countries as we'll as
in America and has acquired great
amount of information in substantial
ton of his arguments on the negative
side on this question, and this informa-
tion he places, by means of this volume,
within the reach of everybody interest
ed in the subject Mr.. Porter starts
out with a compa rison of the methods
of municipal oNnership-Whlc he looks
upon as a menace to progress and So
ciety-in Great Britain and America,
setting forth the dangers of heavy in
debtedneSS that arose in consequence
and goes on to show how the restraint
on American cities, which lies in the
State constitutional limitations of debt,
prevents their raising money for trading
purposes. The question of raising funds
on the credit of the existing public funds
has often, indeed, been the subject of
legal investigation in this country and
has been declared unconstitutional in
several States, including Massachusetts.
Unless tie constitution of such States
were amended so as to permit of the
development of ownership, such owner
ship could rot exist. But in case of
4ha 1aht involve
ments Of the cities would be danger
ously heavy, private undertakings
would be cheapened by threatened aX-
preparation and by public interference,
and individuality would be destroyed,
Inevitably, therefore, ''the position of
municipal trading demands that the
case against it should be submitted, for
the benefit of the taxpayers, as strongly
as possible Industrial and commercial
speculation with money raised by taxa
ton, viewed from whatever standpoint,
and called by whatever name is, in my
opinion inconsistent with the sound and
lust principles of government. Such
trading with the public credit, whether
State or municipal, must, of necessity
lead to stupendous financial liabilities,
add to the burden of the rates, weaken
municipal credit, bring about inequality
of taxation, check industrial and scien-
tifc progress, stop invention, discour-
age individual effort, destroy foreign
trade, establish an army of officials,
breed corruption, create an aristocracy
of labor, demoralize the voter and ulti-
mately make socialistic communities of
towns and cities"
If the above is not an array of dan
gers sufficient to make the strongest
kind of a general case against munich
pal ownership, then the unconvinced
reader should go on, and hearken while
the author pa1ticulariZes against the
dishousing of the very poor by clearing
away of SUM property, while the city,
upon the vacant land, builds tenements
that are rented at rate far beyond
the means of those who have been
rendered homeless. What is the re-
suit? Eot the wiping OUT of the slums,
but the establishing of other slums, be-
cause the poor who cannot pay the
rent must be housed, and somewhere
they find shelter. But, as the author
says; From slums they go and to
slums they return"
Going into the subject Of the owner
II, Nv, aif - cfr
Mr.. Porter says:
Experience seems to indicate very
clearly that in the majority of cases
the municipal control of a tramway
system implies al obstacle to the de-
velopment of that system to become a
part of an extensive interurban system.
In London, to 60 no further, the
municipal tramways only run to its
borders, while those of private systems
continue, though changing is essential.
How, with such restrictions as these
have established the great interurban
street railway systems centering in
Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburg
and Cleveland, to say nothing of New
York and Philadelphia and dozen
other cities which will at once suggest
themselves, L do not know. Could any
Ghing but private enterprise have linked
Minneapolis and st. Paul? | think this
phase of municipal ownership de
serves special attention, for herein it
shows one of its greatest weaknesses.
There is such simplicity of state
ment and at the same time such strong
argument brought by Mr.. Porter to
bear on the question of ownership,
that complicated as the subject would
seem to the average reader, it becomes
understandable by means of the
authors treatment and not only under
standable, but enjoyable; that is, as en-
joyable as the discussion of so serious
an issue can ever be. 1.-The Dangers of
Municipal Ownership is a book that
ought to be a welcome and influential
offset to the pro-municipal ownership
literature that has been scattered
ohroad co ,ronaronclu DIN ipn tho n0cf