Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1922-12-24
DR.. JOWETT ON A SCHOOL FOR SUPER-POWER
LLOYD GEORGE PARENTS NEEDED PLANS CROWN

good will and franchise rights should
properly be included in the schedule
Of assets for which the Government
here must pay.
With these facts as the basis Of dis
cussion, the question resolves into
these elements:
Advocates Of government or mu-
nicipal ownership claim there would
be a reduction OF cost Of power by
virtue Of:
F1rst--Elimination Of taxes. But IL
is held by the economists that taxes
are not eliminated by government
ownership; that just as much money
in taxes is paid. The difference Is in
their distribution. In the case Of pri-
vate ownership only actual users OF
electric power pay the tax bill, while
IN the case of government owned
utilities all the people pay the bin.
Seeond-Elimination Of dividends,
high salaried executives and higher
wage scales and achievement Of higher
labor efficiency.
These claims for public advantage
through government ownership of
with greater confidence before the ex-
periences Of the late war. Certainly
in the war there was not greater labor
efficiency, and it is admitted that many
who formerly were strongly for gov
eminent ownership have receded
sharply from that position lately. It
has been believed it was demonstrated
that, at least as to labor efficiency,
there was less under government oper-
alton than under private operation,
whether in transport or industry.
Opponents point to the subservlency
of government to demands for wage
increases, and also indicate that II
was not due entirely to stress OF war
necessity but also to political induce
ment by party leaders. On the score
OF the claim Of lower salaries and
wages opponents of government own
ership emphatically reject it as to
wages and allege higher wages under
the Government regimen.
But as to higher salarled executives
under private ownership the admis-
sion not only is freely made but urged
as desirable. Engineers point to the
fact that Government experts are no.
toriously underpaid; that 1t is difficult
TO obtain the best science and ex-,
perience at the low salaries Of the
Government; and that the high SAL
aries paid by privately owned utility
concerns are not due, as alleged, to
extravaganza, but to the fact that the
more highly paid men are worth what
they get.
However, as the final test IL is
shown that power is furnished at a
lower cost on the American side than
on the Canadian side. where govern
ment ownership of power utilities OBJ
tains.
These alleged and apparently proved
economies by private control on this
side of the line have been attained,
notwithstanding the American private
companies maintain capacity IS per
cent. per capita in excess OF that MAIN
tanned in Canada, thus assuring more
regular supply and less interruption of
service.
Boiling down these findings 1t ap-
pears that the most efficient test-re-
suits attained-supports the argument
OF private ownership Of the electric
power utilities, and one is brought back
to the alleged elimination of taxes UNI
der Government regimen. This so often
misunderstood thing may be reduced
to this simple statement:
II there be private ownership the
privately owned utility will pay an
nually its taxes into the Government
treasury. If there be Government own
ership no taxes VIII be paid directly
to the Government. If that were equal
TO something more than the alleged
simple redistribution rather than
elimination Of taxes with social bene-
fits there should be lower rates and
better service to show also In the final
list of results.
The figures as given reveal, however.
that on this side of the boundary line
under private ownership there are
both taxes paid by the private COM
panies to the support Of the Govern
ment, and besides, the average price
Of electric current is materially less
here than there to the actual con-
sumer.
Again, as to Canada, II Is shown by
the official figures that the Government
commission both buys power and pro-
duces it. Last year the Government
commission bought 1t from this private
Ontario Power Company at 50 per
horsepower year, and it cost the COM
mission $31.10 to produce such power
in its own plants.
The records in Canada show also a
heavy burden Of public debt in the
form of bonds issued by the Govern
ment Power Commission, The debt
of the Province of Ontario is 10 per
cont. on account Of the Power Com
mission. When direct investment by
the Government In power plants Ia
added the total liability of the Gov
ernment on that account totals $751;
232,O11, for which in the ultimate the
taxpayers are liable, and which in GER
tain contingencies they would have to
pay in their annual rates on assessments.
IT appears, then, that were the Gov
ernment ownership principle applied to
the projected super-power survey devel-
opment, and the conditions remained as
now, the cost to the people would be
materially more for the power supplied
than under private ownership. 1t is
therefore with no idea Of Government
ownership that the super-power plan is
perfected
The idea is that the governmental
agencies shall aid in guiding the devel-
opment of properly financed and organs
lied associations of existing or new
private companies with the intention OF
effecting economic coordination and as
surance of constancy of supply Of ,elec.
trio energy Questions as to Federal or
state control OF the great interstate
utilities to be created are to be an
swered as conditions develop. But that
modern regulation Is to be applied ia
accepted by all concerned as going
without the saying
This will yield the maximum OF sta.