A new body has been organized lately in Chicago, starting a movement for a municipal ownership of the Chicago street cars and elevated trains. The initiators of this body admit that this movement is nothing new in Chicago, and that it has been spoken of for the last twenty-five years.

The fact is even mentioned that twenty-one years ago, when the franchise for the street car company was granted, Mr. Dever, the present mayor of Chicago, was a follower of the idea of municipal ownership. Being that this movement is not a new one in Chicago, it was pointed out by the people who are renewing this movement, that, at the present time when the franchise is about to terminate, and the experience that they had with the street car magnates the last few years while seeking to come to an understanding, proves now more than ever, that the only way to overcome these problems is to take all the street cars entirely out of the hands of the private owners and turn them over to the city government of Chicago, who will administer the street cars and "L" trains on the same basis as all other institutions administrated by the City of Chicago. Whether or not this movement will realize municipal ownership or not remains to be seen.

It is interesting to read the Chicago capitalist press. They fear even the mention of municipal ownership, and they already have started to bombard the small groups of people that have such an idea in their minds.

The arguments that the opposers of municipal ownership present are the same old and forgotten claims, such as those who are constantly yelling that we dare not trust such an important industry as the surface lines in the hands of politicians. There is no foundation to such claims. If it will be proved that in the city government there will be placed only such capable and honest people as are now with the street car company or any private industry, then it will be a real institution.

The opposing side also claims that the people themselves don't want municipal ownership, which has as much truth in it as has the fact that the very opposers of the idea of municipal ownership are themselves responsible for the connection of the people with this problem. They are always first to arouse mistrust and suspicion against the people who constitute the government, and, when it pays them for this purpose, to protect certain private interests they start a rumpus and warn against the danger of combining politics with business.

The certificate plan, introduced by the former Alderman Schwartz, that the city shall issue certain certificates on which the city will be able to borrow money from the private owners was voted down by the citizens. With this fact they want to prove that the people are against municipal ownership. But that is not true. The certificate plan that was at that time introduced did not mention the idea of municipal ownership; this was a common ordinary administration in which the street car magnates would have gone through, it would still have taken over the control of the street cars. The city would have been over its head in debt to pay the street car magnates for their stock and the street car magnates would for many years have the opportunity to make millions of dollars profit through this partnership business.

The majority of citizens were aware of this scheme and disposed of it, but that was by no means a plan for municipal ownership. It is a proven fact that the administration of the street car industry takes millions and millions of dollars and the greatest part of this must come in the form of credit. This is no hindrance to private management. However, this would be one of the greatest hindrances to a city management, because the city is subject to certain legal limitations by the state upon granting loans, 4through the issuance of city bonds. The legislature of Illinois is that body which has the authority as to how much and how far a city may be indebted. This is an argument that cannot be ignored, but on the other hand, there is also a fact that the existence of just such a law convinces us how our lawmakers want to assure themselves against a possibility that a city may sometimes be able to take over the business from private capital and transform them into public property. It is in the interest of large capital that such laws shall exist. But it is very easy for Chicago and the other cities of Illinois to make significant changes in the existing laws. If Chicago and the other cities of Illinois would elect to the legislature, men for whom the interests of the people would stand higher than the interests of the large corporations, Chicago today, would have been independent, in the form of "home rule" and would not have to be under the dictatorship of the law givers in Springfield.

The plan of municipal ownership of the Chicago street car system would at this moment be the most practical plan to solve the long existing add complicated problem. But it is against the interests of large capital for such a plan to go through. The Chicago street cars are too fat a bone to be so easily taken out of the hands of the street car magnates, and for that reason alone the entire movement will be completely in vain.