The Waterbury Democrat., 1932-09-30

Washington--In a review of Gov 1, ernor ,Roosevelt's book. just issued, entitled "Government--Not Polit- | tics" Arthur Krock, head of the New York Times Washington bu- reau and an experienced political analyst, wrotes: Tt has been often asserted by critics of Franklin Delano Roose- welt. that he lacks a program. There-is no lack of program here ... There is no demagogy in these writings Referring to the attempt to make Governor Roosevelt appear as "new Bryan" by representatives of interests which fear legislative working out of his philosophy or government" MT Krock says:
 'His Governor Roosevelt's) pre- script is much more that of a Will | son than a Bryan. He has things to say about regulations of public utilities, investment trusts and hold ing companies which almost para phrase what Wilson said of the capatalistic aggression of 191O- 19l3. Compared with the Theo- dore Roosevelt of 1912, Franklin D. Roosevelt is 8 conservative" Further on in his review MT Krock says: "Mr Roosevelt is critical of the financial and political leadership of the country which placed no curb upon speculation and even encour- | aged the little man to come in. He offers plan to prepare against the next depression and to keep the next high cycle of prosperity within reasonable bounds. It is difficult to
 It n1ss public utility regulation, or any or his comments upon the practices of certain members of that industry, are. other than the broad general interest and fair to invested cap ital." Tho following extracts from Gov ernor Roosevelt's book are set forth in MT Krock's review:
 On Taxation and other Forms of Relief-Actual relief work this winter (1931-1932)' in most places Is too big for private and local facilities to meet. The state accepts the task cheerfully because 1t believes that 1t will help restore that close relationship with it's peo- ple which Is necessary to pre- serve our democratic form of government.
 So far the federal, state and especially the local govern ments have refused to recog- nize other than upon the sur face. We must go deep, slash ing away useless units, offices and officials to balance bud- gets. This will take courage,
 leadership and persistence.
 k0k c
 yeloped with human under standing, 1t works.
 On Public Utilities, the TariR and Public Corruption-The fight of those interested in good
 government is not to break
 faith with the utilities under
 existing contracts but to linn 1t their profits to 8 fair return
 on the actual investment mak- ing due allowance for its safety.
 There is an inherent differ?
 ence between a public utility and other private corporations.
 our common law, dating from
 the days of Queen Elizabeth,
 and most of our subsequent
 statutes, recognize this differ
 ence. Private business may
 earn 100 per cent on it's invest
 ment. But we protest TiSHliy
 when a utility seeks to. earn
 7orA8 per cent not only on the
 original investment but on it's
 watered stock.
 The dilution of the capital
 may amount to as much as
 five times the amout of the
 original investment. This means that the individual citizen Is
 compelled to pay much more
 than is just for his gas or e'ec-
 tric light.
 Public welfare. requires the
 control o fpublic utilities. Who
 shall determine this question
 of control--the utilities or the state?
 Between the utilities and the people the people must win.
 Adequate safeguArds are need'
 ed to protect our American
 standards Of labor. 4ndustrial
 as well as agricultural. A tar.
 if is still essential 10 meet
 those safeguards and to pro.
 duee revenue. But q return to
 sanity is necessary in estab-
 fishing reciprocal methods bys
 which the necessary tnternas
 ti0nnl exchange of goods may
 De started again and sAeour-s aged Co grow.
 Ist us base our revisien pf
 tariff schedules on facts and