New-York tribune., 1921-10-19
Public Ownership

Public Ownership
"The railroad executives can settle
the dispute or the United States gov
ernment can prevent strike" says
Warren S. Stone, chief Of the Broth
erhood of Locomotive Engineers.
The railroad executives can avert
the strike by captivating; the gov
ernment by taking over the rail
roads. Otherwise prepare for fam
inc.
Thus the handsome alternatives Of
wages 151 per cent up or public own
ership are offered. Concerning oper-
alton nothing is said. If the shreds of
private control that remain are eX-
tingushed the brotherhoods, remenl-
bering their success during the Nc
Adoo- Hines period, apparently ex-
pect to encounter no great difficulty
in browbeating the government.
In either event the public is to
pay. There is the public treasury.
During the McAdoo-Hines days its
contents were lightened billion or
more. Perhaps another billion can
be scraped out of it and duly dis
tributcd.
The peepings Of new Matching Of
the Plumb plan are heard. Brother
hood committees still are ready to
assume railway management pro
vidcd they are not asked to carry
any risk. If wages can be stabilized
at a level 151 per cent up and guar
antics established against any lower
ing railway employees will, natural
ly, not be averse to getting half of
any further profits that accrue.
But where Will the owners of the
railroads get off? In the ditch, Of
course. They may console them
selves by papering their miry dug
outs with handsomely engraved Sc
curities which have turned out to be
insecurities.
The railroad owner has been hard
ened by adversities-is quiescent as
sportsmen Of Cleveland and Wash
ington shoot him sitting. In 1916
the rate of return on railroad invest
ment, using the low estimate Of the
Interstate Commerce Commission as
a basis, was GIG per cent. In 1917
it was 5.26 per cent, in 1913 3.5l per
cent, in 1919 2.46 per cent and i'll
1920 O.32 per cent. How it grew
beautifully less, During the years
named other industries greatly pros
pered and accumulated surpluses
against times Of adversely. But with
railroad income dried to the vanish
ing point, Mr.. Stone holds that the
railroads can be squeezed more. His
proper business is not railroading,
but extracting blood from turnips.
The public, which Of necessity
would pay if the railroad executives
should capitulate, would pay, and
pay more, should the choice fall
on public ownership. Individuals
with personal earnings dependent on
personal labors are Industrious, pro-
ductive and economical; a public ad
ministration, with personal earnings
not dependent on Treasury raiding,
is wasteful and runs the taxpayers
into debt. When a political group
exploits utility its profit is at the
expense Of consumers; if there is a
deficit it is at the expense of the tax
payers. In either event a minority
is favored, to the robbery Of the
majority.
Should there be public ownership
Of railroads, as soon as the skill and
capacity developed under private
ownership disappear with time the
cost Of railroad service probably
would double. Conditions under pub
lie ownership would be even worse
than with the present railroad wage
scale perpetuatcd and the law max
ing it capital offense to disturb it.
The alternatives Of Mr.. Stone thus
are in the direction Of a return to
the Stone Age, when title to prop
erty was derived from the weight Of
club and an ability to WELD it. The
selection Of either option would be
so unmixed a calamity that in the
end railroad employees would suffer
from it as mach as others.
Good Luck, Elsie.