The Ely miner., 1913-08-22

adoption at the next election. Let us
be frank about this matter. MY po-
litical enemies are not at all' AFRAID
that l shall end my political carer
by making bad appointments on the
public service commission. Thy
would not shed many bitter tears II
did. But ,ney are afraid that | shall
succeed in securing for Minnesota tae
enactment Of the most important ana
truly progressive measure ever adopt
ed by this or any other state. and that
l shall get some little share OF the
credit for it's adoption.
EXPERIENCE OF OTHER STATES.
While a large majority of the states
now have one or more important pup
lie utilities under state control, the
following states have all their utln-
ties, or nearly so, regulated by
state commission: Wisconsin, Massa-
chusetts, New York, New Jersey, Ne
vada, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,
Vermont, Washington, California ana
Kansas. During the last SIX months
the following states have Deen addeo
to the list: Maine, Missouri, Ohlo'
Indiana, Pennsylvania and Illinois.
Many Of these states have followed
the Wisconsin law, adapting 1t to local
conditions. The experience OF WIS
consin can, therefore, be USED as an
example. In addition to saving large
sums of money in the operation or the
various public utilities by uniform
accounting and statistical information,
the direct reduction of rates by the
Wisconsin commission amounts 10
about $2,500,000 per year. 1t ls estl-
mated that in reduced rates ana
economy of service the Wisconsin
commission has since its organization
made net saving of about $4,000, 600
to the people of that state. This Is
surely most excellent record.
Objections have been made to state
regulation, because certain pubic
utilities are in favor thereof. These
objections are made only for the pur'
pose of creating prejudice. 1t is not
a question as to who are for or against,
it Is a question of right, justice and
equity. Many public utilities In this
state are favorable to state regula-
ton. They know that 1t must come
sooner or later, and also that in other
states, while it has proven a great
benefit to the people, it has not In
jured legitimate business enterprise,
but rather helped it by establishing
more efficient and economic manage
ment, by furnishing expert service and
equipment to every municipality In
the state at minimum expense, ny
providing uniform systems OF valua-
ton and accounting, by eliminating
useless duplication of service as we'll
as equipment, and by attracting to
this service higher grade of experts
and employees through its merit sys-
tenn. The most powerful public utlll-
ties corporation in the state, however,
has been the leader in opposing state
regulation of all public utilities, and
through its influence largely the op-
position to this measure in the last
house was made successful.
It is needless to state that in this.
as in other matters, there are many
honest men who sincerely oppose
state regulation. The strong opposi-
ton, however, comes mainly from
three sources, namely: the large con-
sumers who receive special rates, the
ward politicians, and the Socialists.
AS to the first class the opposition
is we'll founded. Under state regula-
ton all special rates and privileges
would be abolished. The ward poll
ticians Dc not wish to let go OF the
public utinties. This is perfectr
natural. Under the guise of fightin,
for "home rule" they have oppos~o
every ad, need movement to strength
en- and pl rify the administration 81
our cities. They always wanted to 10
il themselves When the fight for
commissiC form of government was
taken up, they cried aloud that the
wards should be allowed to manage
their own home affairs and for many
years succeeded in delaying the adop-
ton of a strong centralized city gov
ernment. The same opposition Is
raised now by the same powers and
for the same purpose. Socialists be.
lieve In public ownership.