Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1913-08-29

New Jersey, Nevada, Rhode Island,
Washington, New Hampshire, Connec-
ticut, Arizona, Maine, Colorado, West
Virginia and Montana
So far as my information leads me,
there appears TO be no statutory regu-
lation of public utilities except rail-
roads by commission in Alabama, Ar
kansas, Delaware, Florida, Idaho,
Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan,
Minnesota. Mississippi, Nebraska, New
Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Tennessee or Texas. If any laws have
been passed in these jurisdictions it
must have been quite recently. That
they will soon adopt public laws, I am
very confident. 1t IS the inevitable
trend of the day.
The only three states that | know
of which provide for home rule for
cities in the matter of regulation Of
municipal utilities are Ohio, California
and Kansas. In This latter state there
exists q form of appeal from the city
authorities TO the state public utilities
commission. 1t will be seen from the
above, that even if Illinois in the pres
ent law. does not reserve the right Of
home rule to it's great cities, it has
been following the precedent estab-
iished by most OF the large and pro-
gressive states of the United States.
Moreover, in signing this law, | am
not only satisfied that | was acting
in the public interest under all the
circumstances, but | further am of the
opinion that even if home rule in the
regulation of public utilities in great
metropolitan cities is advisable, as
believe ii is, that ii would be much
easier to subsequent sessions of the
/ legislature to secure amendments de-
manded by the public in this particu-
lar, than to pass a wholly new law
regulating public utilities. Such | be
lieve is the fact in all cases where
statutes securing great public reforms
! are passed.
Many of the public utility acts now
on the statute books, notably in New
York, have been amended after pass
age in the public interest. In all OF
the states where state commissions
have been given statewide control OF
all utilities, both intra-urban and extra
urban, great good has been accomp-
! lished. | know of no case where there
is demand for a repeal or even for a
material modification of the state
wide commission laws that have been
passed.
Moreover, it has been seriously con-
| tended by some political economists
| that in case of dual control by state
commissions of interurban utilities,
| and city control by city commissions
over intra-urban utilities that conflicts
will inevitably result between the com
| mission in all cases where a utility
| furnishes its product as IL frequently
| does within and without the corporate
/ limits of city. l have been informed
| by one of the railroad commissioners
of the state of California where this
! dual law is in force, that the last leg
| islature has proposed to the people a
I constitutional amendment under which
. the legislature is TO have the power
| to confer upon the state commission
/ control over the rates of public
utilities within the cities of the state
and that it is probable that this amend
ment will be adopted. He also states
that several cities in the state, in
Guiding Palo Alto, Willis, Monterey
| Antioch, Salinas and Eagle Rock have
transferred to the state the power
heretofore given them over public
utilities, and that other cities in the
state have transferred partially theil
power of regulation to the commits
sion. Prior to this year Missouri gave
to the cities of St Joseph, st. Louis
and Kansas City home rule. and the
A. right to regulate the intra-urban bust
ness of its local utilities. Washington
gave his right to Seattle. The 191:
legislatures. however. | am credibl,
| informed, took this power from thes'
cities and placed them under the jur
isdicton OF statewide commissions.
! am thoroughly well satisfied tina
4 We have uOuy in tho Stat Of Tilipoj, .