Facsimile PDF - Online Library of Liberty

37 2 ME THO DS o F sou-4 L REFORM.
operations by which the transfer would havo to be effected,
it will bo found that loss is almost certain to every body
of persons except the shareholders. It is not to be supposed
that any shareholder will consent to have his income reduced
by the sale of his property. TIlus, n person holding $10,000
in railway debenture stock, or good preferencc shares, paying
say 4; per cent., or XGO, will require at, the least such an
amount of Consols as will PiLy the same annual income, namely,
kl5,UOO, which, ut the prevent rnarkct price, would bo worth
&13,800. The operntion must really involve n great loss to
tho Strtte, Lccnuso it givcv n certain income instead of n
somewl~nt precarious one. As a matter of fact, it can hardly
bc seriously supposed that railway pr0pert.y could be purchased
at its present marlict ralue. All tho ordinary stockholders
would claim compens:ltion for prospective gains, and during
thc discussion of the project there mould bo an enormous rise
in tho valua of the shares. During the recent abortive
agitation for the purchnso of the Irish railways, the market
price of the sl~ures in oue company rose from 8 to 37, and
in other cases the rise was from 134 to 3i4, from 33 to 84,
from .It; to 65, from t X to 98, from DO to 112, and so on.
Nom, tlle railFay shareholders of tl~e United Kingdom
we drnost co-cutensire wit11 t,hc wealthy and influential classes.
‘I’hose Ifemlm-s of I’mlinrnerlt who are not actually railway
dircctnrs arc probt~bly, wit11 few exceptions, shareholders, and
it cannot be cspectcd that they would consent t,o any sacrifice
of their Iegiti~mrte interests. The actual Falue of such
property as the whole railway system is n matter of speculation,
but whoever suffers in the transfer, we may be sure t,hat it will
not be the shareholders or debenture-holders. If we may
at all judgc from experience furnished by the transfer of
the telegraphs, everyone interested in railway property should
agitate for its purchase by the State as the surest mode of
increasing his own fortune.
There is yet another fallacy committed by the advocates
of State purchase. They assume that because the Government
have borrowed several hundred millions of money at 84 per
cent., therefore they can I~orrow sis hundred or a thonmnd