Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-07-03

must in logical pursuance of the line
of argument which supports it be post
poned to the time when its people con-
troll the government which Is to man
age their property. the railways. and
when the community. on the same basis
of self-government as other groups of
Americans. is rich enough in taxable
resources to be independent of any
national contribution to capital main
tenance. The proposition at this time is
distinctly premature. 1t is also unnec-
essary. Telephone and electric lighting
charges and service are at this time
the subject OF local complaint. But
there is no great obvious discomfort
with the street railway service. If rea-
sonable complaints of poor service exist
or shalt arise in the future, or abuses
develop hurtful to the public welfare.
they can be met and correction made
through the public utilities commission
II 1t will attend faithfully to its bust
ness of equitable regulation.
The advocates of municipal owner
ship ON principle who believe that the
people OF the community should direct
iy control public utilities should he un-
sition; for II violates naGrantly the
principle that the people OF the COM
muntty. ms taxpayers buying the roads.
should absolutely control them. The
CrOsser bill proposes TINT after the prO-
pie OF the community have burdened
Themselves with millions of debt to buy
the roads the absolute control of the
railways shall be turned over to the
District OmmfAsfOners. who are not
chosen by the people Of the District,
who cannot be discharged by the people
If they fail to give satisfaction Ms rail-
way manaGers. and who are respOn-
sible I'm no manner degree whatsO-
ever to the local community for any
mfsman age ment and loss ON their part
through the blunders of inexperfence.
lie ownership of the local railroads
as proposed by Mr. Crosser means an
absolute reduction of the public control
OF those utilities. This result should
offend and ALLEVIATE every sincere he
lever in the principle that the people
of y community should control through
ownership the public utilities.
Every WashfnEt0ntan who believes
In the wisdom and fairness of the half
and-hnlf provision of the act of 1875
should vehemently resist the CrOsSer
proposition; for by 1t the nation repu-
dates many millions Of District debt,
violating the organic net and setting n
dangerous precedent for similar viola
lions I'm the future. The propagation Is
unintentionally or Intentionally an
sion, Ms vitality dangerous as the Crisp
bill. or the recent JOhnsOn-PrOuty
proposal. OF the eighth section of the
pending District appropriation bill.
The tncurrinE. of n huge municipal
debt in q speculative hier into street
railway ownership In foolish on gen
eral principles, and In suicidal in the
Districts ease since In addition this
debt violates the organic net and sets n
dangerous precedent for Its future vfO-
latiOn.
The Crosser proposition. premature
and unnecessary at this time. wantOnly
stabs the hnlf-a nd-half provision of the
act OF 1873. saddles heavy debt and
taxation burden upon taxpayers al
ready haraSscd. viOlates the principle
of control by the people upon which
the whole argument for municipal
ownership Ii based, and proposes n
transaction which is either foolish or
dishonest with the faint which attaches
to the confiscatiOn of private property
to public uses without due cOmpensa-
ton.