Show I I Nationalization of 0 Public Utilities C 1 fAN PELL PELTI Democrat of or New Nc York lork answering the tho request of the railroad brotherhoods to support their ther plan to continue government control of the railroads s another two years cars is out in a n letter leter in which he ho refuses to vote for such a measure nn and gives gi his is reasons Mr rr Pell Pel declares that that the attempt to continue con con- government control of the railroads is the first firs t step in a campaign 1 for the government operation of other other oth oth- er industries and said that if successful with wih the rail railroads railroads rai- rai roads the thc next would be to nationalize step Stel an attempt such stick public publio utilities as ns tl the gas and electrio light companies com corn panics and certain of the mines I There seems scorns to b bo bc- every even indication that a n determined effort is being bein made to p the thc industries of the country in i tho the mistaken idea idea that government ownership ownership owner owner- ship hip and operation will wil be he beneficial to labor The experiment ex- ex of government operation of the railroads with wih ni ill all its is sad ad consequences does oes not seem to its is leading lead lead- jug ing ilg advocates ad in the least leas lea yet almost all al of the tha former I supporters of or the system syston arc so s thoroughly convinced I of its is utter uter failure and futility that that it probably could not succeed in summoning a corporals corporal's in Congress Congress Con Con- gress besS to support it it Government ownership of public utilities is quite quire gem generally rIy regarded ed as ns a a dead issue The objections to the scheme are nrc namely that the taxpayers object to making g up great deficits which reI recent recent re re- re- re cent history has ha proved would bo be incurred and ud that it i I would bring politics into the administration of the industries in industries in- in resulting in a or a a. vast political machine ma ma- chine It I would destroy competition and American Initiative It I is not practical and anti not American It It is Utopian and contrary to sound public policy |