COMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATION. MELVILLE E. INGALLS, Chairman (Chairman Board of Directors, Big Four Railroad), Cincinnati. ALBERT SHAW, Vice-Chairman (Editor Review of Reviews), New York City. TALCOTT WILLIAMS (Editorial Writer, the Press), Philadelphia. W. D. MAHON (President Association Street Railway Employes), Detroit. FRANK J. GOODNOW (Columbia University), New York City. WALTON CLARK (Third Vice-President The United Gas Improvement Company), Philadelphia. EDWARD W. BEMIS (Superintendent Water Works), Cleveland. WILLIAM J. CLARK (General Manager Foreign Department, General Electric Company), New York City. H. B. F. MACFARLAND (President Board of Commissioners, District of Columbia), Washington. DANIEL J. KEEFE (President International Longshoremen's Association), Detroit. FRANK PARSONS (President National Public Ownership League), Boston. JOHN R. COMMONS (Wisconsin University), Madison, Wis. J. W. SULLIVAN (Editor Clothing Trades' Bulletin), New York City. F. J. MCNULTY (President International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers), Washington. ALBERT E. WINCHESTER (General Superintendent, City of South Norwalk Electric Works), South Norwalk, Conn. CHARLES L. EDGAR (President The Edison Electric and Illuminating Company), Boston. MILO R. MALTBIE (Member of the Public Service Commission), New York City. LEO S. ROWE (University of Pennsylvania), Philadelphia. He resigned May 21, 1906, and was succeeded by EDWARD A. MOFFETT, Secretary (Editor Bricklayer and Mason), Indianapolis, Ind. EXECUTIVE SUB-COMMITTEE ON PLAN AND SCOPE. Professor FRANK J. GOODNOW, Chairman. Mr. J. W. SULLIVAN. Professor EDWARD W. BEMIS. Dr. MILO R. MALTBIE, Secretary until departure for Europe. Mr. WALTON CLARK, Secretary after Dr. Maltbie's departure for Europe. SUB-COMMITTEE ON FINAL CONCLUSIONS. Mr. MELVILLE E. INGALLS, Chairman. Dr. ALBERT SHAW. Mr. E. A. MOFFETT, Secretary. SUB-COMMITTEE ON SUMMATION OF EVIDENCE. Professor EDWARD W. BEMIS. Mr. WALTON CLARK. Professor FRANK PARSONS. Mr. CHARLES L. EDGAR. Dr. MILO R. MALTBIE acted in Professor Parsons' place during his illness. Mr. J. W. SULLIVAN acted in Mr. Edgar's place during his absence. EDITORIAL NOTE When the investigation was being planned by the Sub-Committee of Five, the various phases of the question of municipal vs. private operation of public utilities were grouped into four divisions: One included those relating to the history of the undertaking, the attitude of the public toward it, the franchises granted, the methods of public regulation and control, and the statutes and ordinances in force. The second covered wages, hours, conditions of labor, etc., the organization of the undertaking and the political phases of the problem. The third embraced engineering matters, and the fourth included the financial and accounting factors. In order that each expert might know exactly what matters were to be reported upon by him and what were assigned to others, and in order that no detail should be overlooked, specific questions were prepared to cover every fact which seemed important or essential. The members of the committee and others interested in the subject of municipal ownership were asked to submit questions and to make suggestions. All were then considered, codified and arranged in systematic order by a sub-committee. Some matters were included that later were found not to be important, but it was thought wise to include too much rather than too little, to go too far into the details rather than to limit too narrowly the investigation. Further, in order that the Commission might have before it all the available facts germane to the problem, whether called for in these specific questions or not, the experts were instructed as follows: "The purpose of this investigation is to obtain all the essential facts to enable the Commission to determine the relative superiority of municipal or private operation of public service industries and the conditions most favorable to efficient management. For this purpose, the following schedules have been prepared. It is believed that they cover the essential points upon which data subject to quantitative measures may be obtained. * If any facts should be discovered that are relevant to the investigation, but which are not called for in the follow ing schedules, full memoranda should be made upon separate sheets and sent to the Committee." After the specific questions had been decided upon, they were classified into the four divisions above mentioned and called: Schedule I-General, Historical and Legislative; Schedule IIOrganization, Labor and Politics; Schedule III-Engineering Matters; Schedule IV-Finance and Accounting. These Schedules for the undertakings in the United Kingdom were then assigned to the following persons: Schedule I-all undertakings-Dr. Milo R. Maltbie. Schedule II-all undertakings-Mr. J. W. Sullivan and Prof. John R. Commons. Schedule III-gas works-Mr. J. B. Klumpp and Mr. William Newbigging, of Manchester, Eng. Schedule III-electric lighting plants-Mr. A. E. Winchester and Mr. J. B. Klumpp. Schedule III-street railways-Mr. Norman McD. Crawford and Mr. J. H. Woodward, of London. Schedule IV-all undertakings-Mr. R. C. James and Mr. E. Hartley Turner, of Manchester, Eng. The duty of the experts was to report the facts in accordance with the prescribed forms. They were neither asked nor expected to draw conclusions, nor even to tabulate or arrange the facts, but to fill out the printed blanks, and to leave the work of analysis and of drafting conclusions to the members of the Commission or duly appointed committees. This fact should be kept in mind in reading the following pages, for no attempt has been made in this volume to analyze the data collected or to put the facts into a readable report, but merely to transcribe into a form as succinct as possible the answers given by the experts in the various Schedules for the United Kingdom. The analyses of these Schedules appear in Volume I. The transcription of the schedules for this volume was performed under the direction of Dr. Milo R. Maltbie. So far as possible the answers were grouped and tabulated. To further facilitate comparisons, the municipal undertakings were given first in the order of their size, and then the private companies, according to size generally. Where no answer was given in the schedule, the name of the undertaking is followed generally by a dash "" The presence of dots"...." in the tables means that the inquiry is not applicable, or that there were no data to be given. Where an answer could |