The log cabin Democrat., 1907-01-31

ence in the field of private enter f prise is unnecessary. Private cap ital is always ready to undertake the development of public service industries, and it is altogether ef- fcient in their operation. Since it is unnecessary, it is also unjust to take away away these opportuni- ties for the investment of private capital. MT. John w. Hill has served as consulting, constructing, or operating engineer \of water works under both public and pri- vate ownership, in nine of our most important cities; his thorough knowledge of this question can not be successfully denied. In the No vember number of a current maga- zine, he says: ''I believe that the less municipal corporation dabbles in lines of business which expert ence has demonstrated private par ties are able to conduct successful ly. the greater will be the advan- tage to the people. 7"
 Municipal ownership is unwise in theory, because 1t leaves out of consideration the important and necessary element of self-interest. A man does not devote the time and energy to a municipal enter prise that he devotes to his own af fairs. As there are exceptions to every rule, so there may be excep- tions to this. Indeed, three or four of our patriotic citizens have given a great deal of attention to the affairs of the Conway light plant, and have thus, without doubt, saved it from financial ruin.
 But this may not always be the case. That objectionable type of self-interest commonly called graft, has developed in almost every in- stance of municipal ownership. Opportunity for graft increases in a ratio even greater than the in- crease of the amount involved. Even in Boston, where municipal ownership-is is said to be so success ful, municipal ice, cut from the city reservoirs, was sold at sixty dollars per ton, more than three times its cost. It is much more profitable for officials to help them selves to the public funds under municipal ownership than under private ownership, when they must divide with the promoters of the company.
 We see, therefore, that munich pal ownership of waterworks is un- wise in theory; because 1t is not proper governmental function; be- cause it is Socialistic in tendency; because it interferes unnecessarily and unjustly in the field of private enterprise; because it leaves out the vital element of self-interest; and because it affords opportunity for graft greater-than that afforded by the franchise system.
 We naturally suppose that sys- tenn so unsound in theory does not succeed in practice, and this, in- deed, we find to be the case. Our opponents may try to show, from statistics, that municipal owner ship has succeeded in other places. Although that would not, in any way, prove that municipal owner ship of waterworks in Conway would be a success, we contend that statistics gathered in favor of municipal ownership are unrelia- ble. The most important reason for this is the fact that there is no uniform system of accounting. There are very few cities in which the method used is even a good one. The State Convention of Illinois Municipalities, in 1899, de voted almost the entire time of its session to consideration of this one question.
 The affirmative may also try to show from statistics, that the cost of municipal operation is less than the cost of private operation. On this question we quote from Mir. Allen Ripey Foote. He says Such conclusion can be reach ed only by those who neglect to take account of and to properly value the pro6t-producing factor of self-interest, which is eliminated .R under municipal and retained in full force under corporate manage ment." He discusses this ques- tion of properly computing the cost, at some length; and he gives formulas for calculating the cost under each system. By thus plac- ing the accounts iu directly com DariSOu he very clearly shows