RIGHT!!!

EXCLUSIVE, PERPETUAL, REGULATED FRANCHISES. Better evidence of progress in the correct understanding of questions of street railway policy cannot be desired than is contained in the statements made by Mr. Milo Roy Maltbie in his letter to the Street Railway Commission of Chicago. At this time we can select only a few of his propositions for the purpose of giving them emphasis.

"Whether street railways should be brought under a single management or whether the competitive idea should be observed is no longer a debatable question."

We hope this marks the beginning of the end of the reign of the competition fallacy, which is responsible for laws and decisions without number, that are in direct violation of sound economic principles.

"Progress in the direction of municipalization, to be permanently successful, should be made very slowly and only after thorough investigation and full discussion. Without civil service reform failure is certain to follow."

What city in this country has a civil service sufficiently effective and protected from the greed of politicians to justify it in assuming the responsibilities of the ownership and operation of a public service industry with any hope of securing an economic gain thereby?

"When private ownership and operation is decided upon the franchise should also be unlimited in duration, but the city should be empowered to take over the entire plant at certain stated intervals, such as five or seven years, provided it paid the then value, present cost less depreciation."

We hope the citizens of Chicago and of other cities will be able to understand the wisdom of this proposition. Upon this basis only can a correct administration of public service industries be founded. Before the benefits possible from the adoption of this proposal can be enjoyed, in many states, the people will find it necessary to change many provisions in their state constitutions and statutes. Opinions of courts will come all right when constitutions and laws are correctly drawn.

"In all franchise grants the city should aim to secure lower fares rather than high compensation."

This requirement is so obviously in the interests of the millions, whose sole means of transportation is supplied by the street car, there can be no successful debate upon it before the public. The distribution of a working population where it can be well housed and have plenty of sunshine and pure air, made possible by the rapid transit and low fares furnished by the modern street railroad, is the very essence of practical righteousness. Its beneficence is a blessing to the entire community.

"Experience has proved that unrestricted private

monopoly will not have, ordinarily, the same respect for the interests of the public as will management under public control.”

This is the vital point of the controversy. Unrestricted public or private monopolies are equally odious. We have for years been trying to teach the public that the state should devise a scientific system of regulation for all public service industries and apply it without fear or favor to all public service undertakings, whether owned or operated by municipalities or private corporations. The system of regulation must be identical for both forms of ownership. It must be prescribed and enforced by the

state.

"The congestion of street traffic in the business. portion of Chicago will soon render necessary the construction of subways immediately under the surface of the street, which can easily be reached, and through which the cars coming from less densely populated portions of the city will pass."

The people of Chicago have it within their power to provide advantages for the intra-urban transportation of commodities and persons, in combination with facilities for interstate traffic, that will draw to this city a commerce and population that will far exceed that of any city in the world. They cannot do this while they permit themselves to be dominated. by the ideas of small minds, that are incapable of rightly understanding the requirements of to-day.

How can such minds devise facilities for local and international transportation that will respond to requirements of all the commerce that can be developed during the century to come?

"Having a practical and a legal monopoly, the company would not be obliged to defend itself against outside competition, and could, therefore, make known to the public most every business operation."

We hope the Street Railway Commission will be successful in forcing this instruction into acceptance by the people it represents. We believe all public service corporations stand ready to exchange all the information the public can require for all the protection the public can give. When this is done the public will find that the watered stock irritant has been entirely eliminated from the problem.

Those who give so much thought to the subject of squeezing the water out of corporation securities are following a false scent. The real thing that must be done, before the public service industries can rest upon a sound basis, is to squeeze ignorance out of the constitutions and statutes of states. When this is done the people can enjoy the benefits of scientifically regulated monopolies. In no other way can the best services at the lowest profitable prices be made possible.

TAKING PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE.

"The city should have seized the pier and placed the burden of proof on the other side." This is the heroic method Controller Coler, according to a report of the New York Herald, May 19, 1900, declared should have been used by New York City to acquire dock property.

We believe every civilized government provides in its fundamental law that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. Resting upon this law there is a well-defined course of procedure, by which the "just compensation" to be paid may be determined. The ownership of all private property is held subject to the provisions of this law. This fact is frequently lost sight of in discussing questions pertaining to public improvements under franchise grants.

The right of eminent domain may be regulated by contract, but it cannot be abrogated. A franchise may be granted for the construction of an important public work, such as the building of a transportation tunnel under a great city, giving rights to the constructing and operating company for one hundred years. But this will not absolutely deprive the government from taking possession of the tunnel and property and converting the same to its own use at any time it may desire to do so. The franchise contract,