Evening journal., 1911-03-07
MR. HAMILTONs ARGuMENT.


Tn THE letter which we print today by Mr.. Ham
n ilton. the entire question of public franchises
and their relations TO the community is con-
sidered in theoretical argument perhaps diff
ferent from any of the objections that have been
offered by other critics who have thinly veed the
fact that their opposition to the DUPONT offer is
based on prejudcial and narrow grounds.
The Journal does not think that Mr. Hamilton's
argument will appeal to what may be termed
practical men" for practical men do not look so
far ahead he does and do not consider the
nceties and distinctions that are involved in
finely spun argument such questions as that
which is before US
The Journal however has no objection to con-
sidering the matter in the same spirit that Mr.
Hamilton displays and with what perhaps might
be thought a theoretical argument in reply, al
though The Journal may be pardoned for believing
that il will get a little closer to the root of the
subject than Mr. Hamilton does.
Mr. Hamilton thinks the State Of Delaware
should build the highway itself, and as we under
stand him, let the question of franchises remain
until the future When such franchises are
granted, we presume that Mr. Hamilton would put
around them more restrictions than he fears will
be put around those granted TO Mr. DUPONT. The
element OF the length Of time enters into the
problem.
Mr. DUPONT evidently believes that it will be a
long, very long time before the operation of
public utilities through the State will involve val
uaDle franchises. he THINKS so little OF tne pro-
position a valuable franchise that, according
TO his latest reported Offer he is willing to part
with the franchise TO any legitimate company that
pledges itself TO build the public utilities. IL Mr..
duPonts chief idea the obtaining of these
franchises as they are called, he would want
promptly TO begin to reap the benefits that some
Of his critics may think lie in them.
AS time goes on of two things must happen.
Either the State at some future day will build
trolley line itself or some private corporation or
individual must construct it. II neither course is
pursued, then there will be no public utility con-
struction. If in the future any other man or any
corporation should desire to build a ne-and
for the moment let us assume that there has been
a change in our corporation laws and the State
should have a restricted authority in granting a
franchise different from what it has--the
question would be what should the State require
in return for the franchise?
Is il at all likely that even in the remote future
any corporation would offer to give more for
franchise than Mr.. DUPONT has offered, assuming
that Mr.. DUPONT is actuated only by an idea Of
business? The Journal thinks il would be a long,
very long time, before any corporation would put
up a million Of dollars or more for franchise to
operate a trolley line in Delaware And if such
line should be built under the practice of a pri-
vate ownership of public utilities the only method
that we have ever known in dealing with the pr.
vate owners is by regulation through means of
Public Utilities Commission, an Interstate Com
merce Commission, where the Government is con-
cerned and such a regulation would affect Mr. du-
Points Company or any other company. A
trolley road built down the State at present or
in the immediate future may be a great oppor-
tunity to exploit the people of Delaware. The
write does not profess any keen business judg
ment-Ear from t--but the writer confesses that
he ould not be eager to get any stock in a COM
pany that proposed to build trolley line down
through Delaware, not at present or for some
years TO come at least.
The alleged monopolistic features of the matter
are dwclt upon by Mr.. Hamilton, and we presume
he thinks that if Mr.. DUPONT had the franchise
which Mr.. DUPONT says he is willing to pass along
Mr.. DUPONT would soon become sort of Duke of
Delaware But would not any other cor
poraton that started to build a trolley line
or any other public utility occupy the same
position Of dukedom-that of holding monopolis-
tic franchises. AS matter of fact while the fran
chses might be considered technically monopolis-
tic, they would in reality not be monopolistc.