Rensselaer Republican, Volume 24, Number 1, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 3 September 1891 — UNCLE SAMUEL AS A RAILWAY MAGNATE. [ARTICLE]

UNCLE SAMUEL AS A RAILWAY MAGNATE.

Uncle Sam has always been pictured out as an innocent appearing old gentleman, dressed out in a swallow-tail coat cut from the American Flag. How he would appear in a parlor car on a special train will be seen when he owns and operates all our railways. It has been thought by some that the recent admission of new states, and the seal-fishery complication, together with keeping his eye on the public weather-gusge of his Secretary of State’s Reciprocity train would be about all the irons in the fire that he could attend to, but it seems the hands of Uncle Sam have a quality of expansion equal to a Standard Oil truster. ! But hear him call “Hello! the telephone.” -- Operator—“ Who do you want?” U. Sam —“Put me in connection with the Secretary of Railways.” Operator—“O. K. The line is clearfor the President” U. Sam —“Mr. Secretary have you completed those wild "goose lines in New Mexico?” Secretary—“No, I very much

regret to say, Mr. P„ that the appropriation for that class of lines is exhausted, and the preliminary surveys are not yet complete.” U. Sam (in a great sweat) — “bum the appropriation. You must raise the freights on the trunklines, and use the proceeds on those lines to finish the wild goose roads. (Sotto voice) If those roads are not finished before the presidential convention I shall lose the western delegates sure as sheol. Secretary; “But Mr. P, how about dividends?” U Sam; “It is’nt dividends we are after, its votes, and if those wild goose roads are not completed “P D Q’ a resignation will be accepted.” Secretary; I understood Mr. P, that the increase of freights on the trunk lines was to be used to operate the goose roads after they were in running order, but it was my mistake, the roads shall be completed in time, and with your present instructions the appropriations will be ample, ( aside) Great Scott! won’t the farmers living between Chicago and the east howl though, when 1 raise the freights on the trunk lines to get money to sink on the wild goose lines— but the election will be over by that time, our position will be secure, and if they kick too hard, we can give ’em cheap money. But, joking aside. : JSuppqse the governmen t can operate the railways* and all transportation as well, and at a less cost to the people, because of its economy in saving numerous salaries of officers, and its ability for combining the present numerous railway interests—many of which Bre conflicting—into one great system, with qne tiead, one board of control, saving much from Attorney’s fees, costs of litigation—much from purchasing all supplies in large quantities, and in all ways. Will not the same reasons apply for the government to be the only merchant, the ffldy- hmldwr, only miner, the only manufacturer or the only farmer? Each of these various affairs can be operated at a great saving by large capital, and systematic centralized control. The Dalrymples with their thousand acre wheat fields and steam gang plows can raise and sell wheat cheaper than a quarter section farmer can afford to.

Why not, in fact, take up the Bellamy plan (Looking Backward) where the government runs every business for the common good? The early Christians sold all they had and owned all things in common, “neither said any man that he owned anything.” I wish I could learn the history of that entire movement; they Dvere a picked company, and lived and acted from£ sense of duty, we as a people are not a picked company, many do not act entirely from a sense of duty. How long those Christians perseveied in that plan we have no knowledge, we only know that the plan of communism is not recommended, or practiced, by evangel ieal ohurches to-day. 1 presume they found Judases who carried the purse, and that selfish fellows hid away

nest eggs. The Shakers practice common ownership, one head to plan, one pot fiom which to sup; go examine j them iu their homes! They have j plenty to eat and clothes to wear, ; there are no paupers, no millionaires; look iu their faces, content, no fret, no hurry, just passive waiting for the end. LOn the other hand there is no energy, enterprise, ambition or life; because there are no rewards for any of these things. There is no doubt this people could, under paternal government, live as well as well as the Shakers, and much after the same fashion; but the

life, energy, enterprise and great prosperity that Bellamy pictures in “Looking Backward” would never be there. Common ownership, pot-luck service go with potluck life; enterprise and communism caßnot marry, or if they could enterprise would not long wear the breeches. Life the rnoßt intense, ambition unbounded, ehterprise and genius to excel, is the nature of the American people; you may no more cramp, thwart or strangle this nature of our people, than you could stop the flow of Niagara. And the political party that undertakes it will be in the condition of those who go over the falls, it will not be found. But government would not econ-' omize. It is not built that way. The government ownership of railways, granted,—the building of all future roads won Id IwAmfl hor duty, and they would be built; no fear for that, every member of Congress would be unable to satisfy his constituents unless he got a bill through for a road; To accomplish this he would have to log roll or omnibus the whole lot. Do you believe a western farmer Congressman would let slip a chance to get a railroad? not he; roads would be built in hundreds of places where the business requirements would not warrant, and —as in the mail service—the earnings of other roads would have to be taxed to pay for operating the poor roads, or money drawn from the Treasury to supply the deficiency. This would necessitate the raising of freights on all trunk lines to a puce higher perhaps than that now charged. Could such a condition of affairs prove a blessing to all the people? Economy in the construction of railways, requires a personal interest in the material for building, and in the road after its completion. The government’s agents for building and overseeing would have no interest prompting economy in anything either in building the roads, or operating them after they were built. Lavishr expenditures would be. the rule. In some of the small States of Europe government management of railways is to some extent practiced. The comparative small area of territory covered makes this possible, but the service rendered the public cannot compare in efficiency or comfort with ours. There being no competition for traffic, there is no inducement to please the public with fine cars and quick trips. And the construction of long roads undertaken by one state only —Russia—has proved the most corrupt and extravagant in management of anything heard of in the line of Railway building, unless it be The only instance of the kind in the history of this country —the Pacific railways—by Uncle Sam. It is easy to see that the government control of railways would cut off the profits of capital invested, and the building of railways by private enterprise would cease enf - No one will voluntarily putcajP ital where it will give no returns, nor where its reasonable control will pass from his hands. The same danger that would menace the people from the numerous officers and patronage of government banking, would only in a less degree be connected with the control ot railroads. Every innovation that shall add to the forces of government employes intensifies the danger by helping to maintain a party in power after its usefulness is past

“But then,” says my friend, “is all this complaint of the farmers, against the present management of railways without reason? and is the present condition of railroad freights such as should satisfy a well disposed people? and should not the government exert a control over the railway corporations? In answer I would say, that the State by law controls the individual citizen, not in such a manner as to hamper or clog his business, nor to prevent him from reaping ft fair reward for his investments, but to prevent extortion in his dealings with his fellow men; there is good reasons for such control; and such reasons are intensified that the State should control all corporations. The statute conferring rights and privileges of any kind to a corporation is bad, if at the same time the citizen is not protected; men are selfish, this principle is not lessened by a multiplication of personal interests*! under one management and the corporation, unless controlled by law, is strongest, whereas the individual should be first served when it comes to a question of justice. A government that will charter and leave them unrestrained to work hardship to the

citizen, lacks at least some of the essential qualities of a good government. Government should keep vigilant watch over its corporations, first to see that they perform as fully as possible all they promise in their petition or application for Charter, and that such duty shall be performed at as little expense and ganger to the public as consistent with honest service and good management. Facilities for transportation should equal the demand, and charges shonld be kept within reasonable limits. LoDg lines of railway through sparsely settled and undeveloped districts cannot be shortened by law, but the watered stock can and ought to be evaporated by a scaling down in the price of freights to a fair interest on the actual cost of construction and equipment and a fair allowance for coßt of running expenses ahcTmaihtenance. And tUe law should be so worded, that the burden of its enforcement should not rest on the citizen. The State by its Attorney enforces the law against the individual wrongdoer, much more should she hold in check and punish trespassing corporations on whom she has conferred life. Any further interference by government than this in the business of corporations would prove disastrous, not only to the corporations but to the public itself. Enterprise is the life of the nation. Think not that any enterprise employing three million peopleyandcoming directly, or indirectly in daily contact with almost every industry in the land as the railway interest does, can be trameled, hedged up or even discouraged without great detriment to every industry, and to none more so, than to that of the farmer. Co mpetition betweenpublic carriers should be encouraged, and combinations to prevent competition should be prohibited by law. The right for government to control is unquestioned, it has been conceded by the best of authority.

The Cullom Bill was an effort in that direction but it is onlyjan index of what should be done. But good things come slow. The immense capital in is a power in this land, in Congress, in Court, and at the polls their influence is exerted, and if allowed they will continue in future as in the past, to compel the people to pay interest on vast amounts of watered stock. Not only the farmer, bat the shiper and the consumer are interested in an honest, economical and just 'management of railways. And the further right of voting in such a manner as in their judgment will soonest procure relief, is the privilege of each voter. Many good business men doubt the propriety of limiting in any manner railway charges for transportation, thinking the natural law of competition will in time regulate the price—and so it would, were it not that combinations are formed to prevent competition—such persons reason, that every person is free to put his money into any kind of business,—the rule is to put the money where it will bring the greatest returns —. All kinds of property are in the market for sale; each person is free to buy mines, factories, farms or. railways; inclination, judgment and means to buy, are the only control. Does farming pay best? farms are for sale. Does manufacturing offer the best returns; factories are for sale. Do railways promise the largest profits; railway stocks are for sale.

Brother farmers! The railway interests of this land are, —next to agriculture—the greatest public benefactor: and the building of railways by private enterprise has directly multiplied the price of land, and profits of farming, proving both to the farmer and consumer a blessing.

Does anyone believe any great number of railways would nave been built, had the State Baid to the railway builder, “we will not guarantee you any returns on your investment, but we will see to it, that in case the road proves a profitable venture, that your profits shall not exceed that of any other ordinary business; with that understanding. Mr. Railroader, you take the risk. Your road if built, will more than doable the value of every acre of land for miles each side of the track, but that is only an incident which concerns the farmer, whose profits shall not iu any way be disturbed. Would not we as farmers be quick to resent an interferenc by the State in the price or profits of any fanning interest? We certainly would—as the saying is—kick like steers. But there isjmedium ground, where honest business men of all industries can stand, teach demanding of the others an honest service at reasonable cost and including self as one of the factors to share

in both profit and lose. The farmer, the merchant and the miner carry on their business without calling on the state for help: but the railway company calls foi help the very first move it makes. It asks the authority of eminent domain, the greatest power that can be conferred by law. And for this very valuable franchise it promises to do a certain work for the public. This promise, if it ia worth anything to the people that conferred the franchise to the company, has in it the rendering of a service to them of the greatest possible efficiency, and at a reasonable cost. And if such service cannot be obtained without compulsion, then legal enforcement is justified. A reasonable control by the government of railway corporations is a public necessity and will be conceded by just minds, but the ownership and management of the railways by Uncle Sam would very likely prove a foolish investment. W. W. Gilman.