But whether or not too great stress was three-cent fares we learned
during those months of wearisome and futile negotiations, that the
theory was not scientific. The people were entitled to their money’s
worth in service, the company to adequate pay for the service it
rendered, and as the basis of the whole transaction was a public
necessity, the city had the right to control the service, to dictate
what it should be. The old theory was that the people existed for
the street-car company; the new principle was quite the reverse; the
street-car company was but a temporary instrument of social service,
and the social right was paramount to all others.
The company therefore was entitled to a fare sufficient to enable
it to provide the service thus demanded, and to do this it must
charge enough to pay its operating expenses, taxes, and interest,
enough to meet the cost of improvements and depreciation, and to
pay a reasonable return on its investment. It was not entitled to
any speculative return. There was no longer on the company’s part
that risk its predecessors in interest, the pioneers or promoters or
whatever they were, had been compelled to take; its investment was no
longer precarious; nothing, indeed, could be more certain than the
stability of street railway investments. Their securities, based upon
a public necessity, supported by the diurnal comings and goings of all
those thousands and hundreds of thousands of people, had become in a
certain very real sense, a fixed burden upon the people of the city,
a burden as fixed and inevitable as taxes. In the hands of private
owners such securities, under a franchise ordinance properly drawn,
partake largely of the character of municipal bonds, which indeed
they resemble in fundamentals and ends. The issue of securities was
therefore to be as jealously guarded as an issue of municipal bonds,
and overcapitalization, the prolific source of so much evil, was to be
prevented. The enterprise had become as stable as any human institution
can be, and with the limited risk there was to be applied the
familiar principle of limited profit. The principle was recognized in
Cleveland, where the return fixed as reasonable was 6 per cent., which
is but little more than municipal bonds pay. And when this principle
is established, municipal ownership almost automatically follows;
investors used to large speculative profits, are ready to sell out to
the municipality; thus, by indirection, democracy comes into her own.
It was easy enough to fix most of the elements of this return; the
accountants could do that, in their intricate discussions of car-miles
and curves and straight lines of depreciation and points of saturation
in traffic, and all that, but the tremendous difficulty was to
determine just what the investment was and what was a reasonable return
on that investment.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account