The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-08-18
MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP
 A SUCCESS IN MONROE
An Answer to the Criticism Municipal Ownership by Nor
 Walker of New Orleans.
BY c. H. TRoUsDALE.

Monroe, La, August 7.-(Speclal.) )-Mon- roe Is coming in for as much attention and advertising just now on account of its development of the municipal owner ship idea as 1t did when it's enterprising and progressive mayor, pr. A. A. For sythe, set the first municipally owned electric street railway in America in operation something over a year ago, but the attention and advertising is of quite different nature. An anti-mu- 1 nieipal ownership propaganda has been afoot and to work and Monroe is be- ing held up as a horrible example Of , too much municipal ownership and so- cialsm gone wild. It's every venture in this new field of municipal endeavor and government, without rhyme or reason, is pictured as a dismal failure. That this propaganda is inspired and paid for by public service corporations interested in combating and killing the growth of municipal ownership rather than by any school or economic thought for political reasons and the good of the people mas been thoroughly demonstrated by the ex- posures in Golfers of the M. 0. Pub lisning bureau and other such concerns, and that Monroe Is the chief object of attack because of its conspicuous achieve ments along this line is established by the following extract from a New Or leans 'special' to the Columbia, s. C., State under date of July 30, dealing with the subject under discussion.
 ''ln the municipal ownership propa ganda and panegyrics with which the country has ben flooded lately. Monroe (which is one of the stock cases cited) is given as a town of 15,O00 people. As matter of fact, 1t had 542S at the time of the last census, 1900; and as 1t is an old and steadily growing city, not a 'boom' town, 1t may have between 750O and 5000 today. It has always been an enterprising energetic and prosperous town, with citizenship of a high order, and was advancing rapidly before muni- cipal ownership struck it."
 While the main thing the public is concerned about is the success or non success of municipal ownership in prac- tical operation it is well that the source whence these attacks eminate be known. To show the prejudice of the writer of the foregoing it Is only necessary to call attention to the fact that he argues against the possibility of Monroe, a town of 542S population in 19O0 becoming a city of 10,O0e in 1907. The fact Is that Mon roe has more than trebbled in population during that time and that property val ues have also more than trebbled-all as a result of the progressveness of the city government and the exemplfica- tion of the municipal ownership idea as
 
 city market, city sewerage, the clty's free traffic bridge, the city water and fght plants the municipal street rall- way the city park. race track and ball grounds, and the city theater.
 It will not be argued that the city, with it's many natural advantages, would not have materially advanced had these im- provements not been made or had they been made under private instead of mu- nicipal ownership, but the fact remains that, with the exception of the water and light systems, they were not and would not have been made by private enter prise except at the sacrifice to the people of valuable franchises. These public util- ities and franchises are now worth fully a million of dollars, are constantly in- creasing in value and they have been saved to and belong to the people Therefore, in all candor and fairness 1t Is submitted that municipal ownership in Monroe is a success notwithstanding and despite the opposition at home and known and unknown encountered by Mayor FOrsythe in bringing it about
 brief history of the birth and growth of municipal ownership in Monroe Is here necessary Nine years ago Dr. A. A. forsythe was elected mayor and to him more than to any other man or set of men is it due. He went into office on a platform of public improvements calling for the modernizing of Monroe In that i year, 1898, a new state constitution was adopted in which a provision was in- i corporated authorizing municipalities to i issue bonds for public improvements and l under and through his initiative Monroe l ~aJ the first city In the state to take advantage of the provision. An issue of sl55,O0O was voted-there being only eight i dissenting votes-for the following pur- i poses: $40,0 000 for street paving s20,000 for , a hifri1 ] age; 5000 for charity hospital; $60.0O0 for water and lights.
 ! Up to this time the only public utili- ties enjoyed were water and lights under private ownership. The service was in i different, though the franchise paid hand somely, and here began the campaign for municipal ownership. With the ! granting of the water and light fran i chlse tax of three and one-half mills for ten years had been voted to the l private concern to pay for street light ing and water for fighting fire Mayor Forsythe argued that if the franchise was profitable to the private company, it l would be more profitable to the city and people and the s60,000 of the bond issue was Used in the purchase of the plant ] The tax of three ond one-half mills then ceased and the service was continued to { the people at the same rates charged by ahe private company, which was a sav- ing of the tax to the property taxpay- ] CTS. The rates were somewhat high but , could not be rehabilitated. It is now practically new so far as machinery is concerned at the expenditure euualing th purchase price. The policy of the mayor is to use the net earnings for hetterments and extensions and to add other utilities with the ultimate end in view when all utilities needed are ac- quired to reduce the cost to consumers to the minimum, the principle of munich pie ownership being the best service possible at the least possible cost
 The yield from the bond issue was in- adequate for the purposes above indi- cated and the difference was made up from the general fund and other sources and as stated a school building for which only S20,G00 was provided was erected at a cost of ss50C0. This achievment won for Mayor Forsythe wide reputation as q resourccful financier and notwithstand- ing he had strong opposition fer reelec- tiOn in the succeeding election he was successful by a handsome majority. The campaign for the Municipal Street Railway began in 1903 and the fight was carried into the state legislature session of 1904. d charter grant being necessary to enable the municipality to own and operate street railway. The opposition was led by private corporate interests who wanted the franchise and by others who professed to fear the danger of corrupt ring and machine" rule under public ownership. Mayor For sythe won out and the charter was amended as desired. In the mean time special tax of five mills for ten years