"WWteW7
t hi r -
i
y
OCTOBER 25, 1907
The Commoner;
fW
p
i
abstract theories of governmental functions
-when the question was whether important work
should be done or neglected. Many facts sup
ported this view. Some states even, as in the
matter of interstate liquor shipments, insisted
that their own laws were being nullified unless
the federal government lent a helping hand in
their enforcement. But the past months "have
shown that, even as a practical question purely,
there are two sides to this Issue of state func
tions. The states differ in their ideas to a
greater extent, we Imagine, than moBt of us
supposed. With the "Jim Crow car" movement
o have little enough sympathy, yet it must
be reckoned with aa a powerful force against
a' thoroughly centralized railway policy, still
more against government ownership.
Nor is it necessary to take extreme cases
like Delaware's whipping post, South Dakota's
divorce courts, and New Jersey's corporation
offices for evidence of the fact that the states
do have minds of their own, even though, like
the minds' of individuals, not always entitled
to admiration. There is hardly a department
of public activity in which there is not some
movement to secure uniformity of legislation.
Influential men .attend conventions devoted to
these objects. A complete outfit of "model
laws" is at the disposal of every state legisla
ture free of charge. Justice, neighborllness,
convenience and efficiency are all to be promoted
by uniform laws. They do make considerable
progress In certain departments, yet at some
point they come to grief on local crotchets or
convictions. The passage of an imaginary line
can change the status of a man or thing in ways
that are magical. Yet not all of the local differ
ences that excite so much mirth in their critics
are mere products of chance or Indifference.
Like so many human beings, the states go on
liking their own ways best.
Already Bomo federal policies impinge on -local
prejudices. Though the powers exercised
under the "interstate commerce clause may carry
their own mitigation, since a state may. indulge
its own whims in respect to local traffic and
products consumed at home, clashes between
thp two are appearing. The disputes over the
jurisdiction of inferior federal courts have at
tracted most attention, but other questions point
to the same condition. Most of the opposition
to the government's4 regulations for the use of
its grazing lands have doubtless boen mne by
men with scant regard for the large public In
terests. We reprinted the other day, however,
an argument from a Montana newspaper making
the point that Montana had worked out for
"herself a system of cattle-control based on the
registration of brands, and that the government
seeks to wipe this out entirely. The system
may not have been better, but the claim is made
that it suited local conditions. As federal act
ivity spreads still further it is bound to supplant
in the same way other solutions of local
problems.
The states' rights sentiment of today has
little in common with Its ante-bellum namesake.
That it can take first, or even second place, as
a campaign issue next year, is very much to be
doubted. But the states are sensitive in a pecu
liar way. Interference with their locals affairs
is Irritating. And from the democratic point of
view the issue has a peculiar piquancy from the
fact that "most of the state officials who have'
resented the friction are themselves republicans.
oooo
THE RALLYING KAILROADS
The railroad presidents and. railroad mag
nates, just as the World-Herald predicted, are
falling over themselves to support President
Roosevelt In his demand for complete and ex
clusive federal control of the railroad business.
In his historic St. Louis speech, in which the
president made definite announcement of his
doctrine, he said:
"The railroads themselves have been
exceedingly shortsighted In the rancorous
bitterness which they have Bhown against
the resumption by the nation of this long
neglected power. The control must
.exist somewhere; and unless It is by thor
ough going and radical law placed upon -the
statute books of the nation. It will be
exercised In ever-increasing measure, by the
several states."
The warning and the Invitation were all
sufficient. The railroads, without Tiesltation,
have cast their lot With the president in favor
of. control by the federal government alone, and
against control In which both the federal gov
ernment and the states shall share. They fear
the states far more than the nation. The states
respond 'quickly to popular sentiment; the na
tional government responds slowly. The states,
in two or three years, have dono much in tho
way of railroad control; the national govern
ment, in almost twenty years, has dono nothing
that is of any real consequence.
And so the railroads are falling into lino
with the president. Says President Mather of
the Rock Island:
"A wise and just regulation is only
possible under a singlo and centralized au
thority. Tho day is passed for unyioldlng
opposition to all policies of federal control
of our carrier corporations. Nay, more,
tho day has dawned in which to welcome
that control."
Says President Ripley of tho Santa Fe:
"Wo have too many masters. Wouldn't
it be better for us if we had a single1, central
source of regulation instead of so many?"
Says President Harahan of the Illinois
Central:
"Mr. Mather's statement, In my opin
ion, pretty well expressed the feeling of
railroad presidents .and managers. The
trouble is and has been that the states have
various laws which conflict with tho inter
state laws."
Says President McDoel of tho Motion:
"The point Mr. Mather made as to fed-
eral regulation and control struck mo as a
sensible and sane one. F think that most
railroad officials will approve it as I do.
Tho troublo Is that when a road runs
through ten or fifteen states it must oper
ate under a variety of laws that make
obedience well-nigh Impossible."
And President Felton of tho Alton said he
"thought well" of "fedoral control and regula
tion as a substitute for 'the existing system of
varied laws and regulation as Imposed by the
various states."
And there you have it "Exclusive fedoral
control will bo bettor for us," say the railroads.
They welcome the prospect. They want It so
bad they will fight for It. Why? Simply be
cause they know the states have on their fight
ing clothes and mean business.
The- people of the contral, southern and
western states will revolt against this program.
Their position is correctly stated in tho plat
form adopted by the democrats of Nebraska,
which favors giving tho federal government all
the power that may be necessary for tho reg
ulation of Interstate commerce without in any
way interfering with or diminishing the power
of the states over traffic within their own
borders. Omaha World-Herald.
OOOO
MR. TAFT ON IMMIGRATION
Two years ago about June, 1905, Secre
tary Taft gave an interview relating to Chinese
immigration. A Commoner reader asks that
this interview be reproduced, together with the
Commoner's comments on tho same. In the
interview referred tq Mr, Taft said:
"Is it just that for the purpose of ex
cluding: or preventing perhaps 100 Chinese
coolies from slipping- into this country
against the law, we should subject an equal
number of Chinese merchants and students
of high character to an examination of such
an inquisitorial, humiliating, Insulting -"and
physically uncomfortable character as to
discourage altogether the coming of mer
chants and students?
"One of the great commercial prizes of
the world is the trade with the 400,000.
000 Chinese. Ought we to throw away the
advantage which wo "have by reason of
Chinese natural friendship for us, and con
tinue to enforce an unjustly severe law, and
thus create in the Chinese mind a disposi
tion to boycott tho American trade and to , ,
drive our merchants from Chinese shores,
simply because wo are afraid that we may
for the time lose the approval of certain
unreasonable and extreme popular leaders
of California and other coast states?
"Does the question not answer Itself?
Is it not the duty of members of congress
and of the executive to disregard tho un
reasonable demands of a part of tho com
munity deeply prejudiced upon Ibis sub
ject In the far west, and Insist on extending
justice and courtesy to a, people from whom
we are deriving and are likely to derjye
such Immense benefit in the way of interna
tional trade?"
It will be seen that "the $400,p00,000 com
mercial prize" Is the thing that fills the secre
tary's oyes, and anything la regarded as "unrea
sonable Uiat stands in tho way. llo underesti
mates tho number of Chinese who would come
in as laborers and denounces as unreasonable
tho demands made by tho laboring mon of tho
country that thoy bo protectod from a hordo of
Chinese coolies who aro not assimilated or
brought to tho American lovel of living, but
simply displaco American workmen. It is fort
unato for tho country that thus early in his
presidential campaign Secrotary Taft so clearly
aligns himnolf with tho capitalistic side. For
forty years the manufacturers havo taxed the
whole country for tho ostonsiblo purpose of giv
ing good wages to Inbor; but now when thoy
begin to reach out for tho markots of tho world
thoy aro willing to sacriflco the wago earner to
commercial advantages. They Insist that tho
goods mado by coolies shall bo shut out, but
thoy aro willing that tho coolies thoniHelvcs shall
co mo In. If tho Chtneso could como with a lovo
for our institutions and for tho purpose of Identi
fying thomsdlvcB with our futuro it would bo a
different question, but thoy presorvo their
Orientalism and form a permanently distinct
class among us. Their presonco is ouro to brood
race troubles that will bo more hurtful to trado
than any exclusion act can bo.
Many of tho republican loaders will bo In
sympathy with tho policy that will flood tho
country with cheap Chlneso labor, and an Im-r
perial policy tends to givo encouragement to
tho cheap labor proposition.
Tho Chinese question is ono that affects
tho entire country, not tho Pacific coast alone
or tho laboring mon alono. It is truo that the
Pacific coast would fool tho evil offccUi of Chi
nese Immigration first, and It Is also truo that
tho laboring mon would como into immediate
contact with Orlontal labor, but in its ultimate
influonco tho subject touches all parts of the
country and reaches all classes. Tho questloa
Is whothor wo aro going to build up a strong, in
dependent, upright and patriotic peoplo and de
velop a civilization that will exert a helpful In
fluonco on all tho world, or whether wo aro go
ing to bo a greedy, grasping nation, forgotful
of high ideals and concerned only in tho making
of money-
Chinese Immigration Is defended by two
classes of peoplo. First, by those, comparative-'
ly fow in number, who bolicvo that universal
brotherhood requires us to welcome to our
shores all peoplo of all lands. This Is tho sen
timental argument advanced in favor of Chi
nese Immigration. Thore Is no more reason
why wo should construe brotherhood to require
tho admission of all peoplo to our country than
there is that we should construe brotherhood to
require tho dissolution of family ties. The fam
ily is a unit; It is tho placo where character and
virtue and usefulness are developed, and from
the family a good or evil influence emanates,
It is not necessary nor even wise that tho family
environment should bo broken up or that all
who desire entrance rho Id bo admitted to the
family circlo. In a larger sense a nation is a
family. It is the center for the cultivation ojC
national character, national virtue and national ,
usefulness. A nation Is -under no obligation to
tho outsldo world to admit anybody or anything
that would injuriously affect the national
family; in fact it is under obligation to itself
not to do so. Tho influence of tho United Stte
will bo much more potent for good If we remain
a. homogeneous nation with all citizens in full
sympathy with all other citizens. No distinct
race like tho Chinese can come Into this country
without exciting a friction and a race prejudice
which will make Jt more difficult for vh to exer
cise a wholesome Influence upon tho Chinese la
China, not to speak of our influence on othor
nations.
The second, and by far tho larger class, em
braces those who advocate Chlneso Immigration
on tho ground that it will furnish cheap labor
for household and factory work. There is no
force In the argument that Is made by some that
it Is difficult to secure girls to do housework.
If domestic service is not popular as Compared
with other work, it Is ecauso the pay is not
sufficient to make It attractive and the remedy
lies In better wages. Labor can bo secured for
any and every honorable position when the price
is sufficient to attract it, and the demand for
Chlneso servants comes with poor grace from
those who often spend on a single social enter
tainment as much as a servant's wages would
amount to in an entire year. At this time when
skilled and intelligent American labo is able
to compete in foreign markets with the cheapest
labor In the world. It is absurd to talk about the
necessity for cheap factory hands.
i1
Tl
4
1
; jie .a&i tuimpmitj-'''' J "ft" "J
T.
