" wmmmm.tM'mvypt"'
ncw'nriwni""'i"tinf"wi 't- - r
i
VI
i
The Commoner.
WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR
i
Vol. 5. No. 21
Lincoln, Nebraska, June 9, 1905
Whole Number 229
-4X.
CONTENTS
What Government Ownership Means
MR. Winston's Experiunge '
Rear Admiral Melville's Opinion
Branch Banking
"Characteristically Republican"
Mr. Roosevelt As a Free Trader
"Op Such Is The Kingdom"
The Work of Democratic Editors. ,-
x - , '
Comment on Current Topics
yK?r X Uii A TJllilA.lt X A Ai-ULUjU. v,
r
J
News of TnEi Week
if
"-.
WHAT REMEDY, THEN?
The Houston (Tex.) Pos says: "It looks easy
at first glance to solve the trust problem ,by na
tionalizing the trust. For instance, the govern
ment ownership of railroads would cure the evils
of railway combination and . oppression. But no
sooner would this be accomplished than the pres
ent owners of the railways would invest their
money in some other industry under a trust or
ganization, and the nation would be compelled
to buy that alsd. Already "there are scores of
trusts if the truth were known probably there
are more than a hundred, covering the principal
manufactures and commodities of daily necessity.
It is easy to foresee that if a halt is not called the
'captains of industry' will capture everything the
people use."
What remedy would the Post suggest? Or are
we to understand that, although the Post admits
that "if a halt is not called the captains of indus
try will capture everything the people use," it
would have the people tamely submit to con
tinued imposition?
iffll&h sittr. m,i u .........rr JPf." ' HTffii.
MJiuy I regulation Kjsssgvv.i . mi ' ,m
UNCLE SAM"What a Blamed Chump He Is!"
WHAT GOVERNflENT OWNERSHIP I1EANS
The Trend of Public Ownership and the Possible Outcome
The subject of public ownership is one that
is occupying a larger and larger share of public
thought. A few years ago the advocate of the.
public ownership of municipal franchises was dis
credited by those who are in the habit of calling
themselves "the more intelligent" and "the more
practical." "Socialist" was usually applied to one
who had the temerity to suggest that cities should
do their municipal work directly rather than
through franchises given or sold to private cor
porations. Gradually the discussion brought out
a distinction between what are now termed nat
ural monopolies and enterprises in which compe
tition is possible, and there was developed a school
-of political economists who insist upon public
ownership wherever competition can not be made
effectiv.e. Upon this basis a strong sentiment in
favor of municipal ownership of municipal fran
chises has been built up, and, where the question
has been clearly presented to the people and their
opinion sought, the answer has usually been in
favor of such ownership.
The water plant was the first to be taken over
by the city authorities. It was found that private
ownership resulted, first, in a contest over rates,
and that this contest often resulted in the corrup
tion of the municipal body in which was vested
the power to fix the rates. Next, it was found that
a private corporation having a monopoly of the
water supply was slow to extend its lines to ac
commodate sparsely settled sections, and still
Written by W. J. Bryan for "Success" and
reproduced, by courtesy of that magazine.
more slow to improve the quality of the water
where the improvement was likely to temporarily
reduce the dividends. The progress in the ex
tension of municipal ownership to water plants
has been gradual, but steady, until now it is the
rare exception that a city of any size leaves the
water supply in the hands of a private corporation.
Next to the municipal water plant has come
the municipal lighting plant, whether the light
furnished is gas or electricity. At first the city,
furnished light for the streets; afterwards it began
to supply private consumers. While as yet a
smaller proportion of the lighting plants than of
the water plants has come under municipal owner
ship, the tendency is an irresistible one and the
progress in the municipalization of these plants
is likely to be much more rapid than it was in
the conversion of the water plants from private to
public ownership.
In some cities private heating plants have
been chartered, but the same objections found to
private water plants and lighting plants v111
apply to the .granting of franchises to heating
plants. Just in proportion as these plants become
useful and- extensive the objections to private
ownership will become apparent. If it were pos
sible to have a dozen private plants running their
pipes through the streets and competing for the
privilege of furnishirig water, light or heat to the
inhabitants of a city, competition might protect
the patrons, but even then there would be an im
mense waste in the duplication of plants.
With the telephone.. system a new field for
municipal ownership has been opened, and it" is
Inevitable that, sooner or later, the private tele
phone exchange will go the way of the private
water plant and the private lighting plant. Any
one who has lived In a city where an attempt
has been made to. regulate telephone rates by the
establishment of competing companies knows how
inconvenient it Is to have to patronize two or more
telephone systems or to be cut off from communi
cation with a portion of the city. The municipal
telephone Is one of the certainties of the future.
The municipalization of the traction lines has
met with more opposition, because the building
and equipping of a car line Involves the expendi
ture of a larger sum of money, and because tlfe
operation of It requires the employment of a larger
number of men; but, with the growth of the cities,
the pfessure in favor of municipal ownership is
increasing. In Boston a subway has been built
which reverts to the city at the end of twenty
five years. The New York subway (the main
i
1
A
4
