Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Aug. 12, 1904)
fmmmmm , ' j$'Htmfiffi The Commoner. VOLUME 4, NUMBER 30. -" A, ploycs of tho national government. owerlcss as tho people would un doubtedly bo to rectify evils imposed by tho misconduct of an administra tion supported by sucn an army of adherents, it appears that in avoiding one difficulty Mr. Bryan has fallen into another almost as serious. IIo proposes that there shall be, for con tinental America, forty-eight railway systems, each confined by state or territorial boundaries. Does ho think that tho general boards ho proposes could defeat the consequences of state jealousies and divergent state inter ests? Breaking of bulk and transfer of freight from car to car are costly im pediments to interstate transportation, but exceedingly profitable to the com munities who are thus enabled to im pose an effective tax upon traffic that would othcrwiso pass uninter rupted and toll-less through their lim its. "VVjould it not seem profitable to many state legislatures to create condi tions that would make trans-shipment at state points necessary? Again in terstate railways must be constructed for tho broad purposes of interstate commcrco and not with the narrow .view of .state and local interests. How long would tho Pacific coast have waited for railway connections with tho oast if Arizona and Nevada and New Moxico had been relied upon lor tho outlay required for the links of the through line-which lie within their respective borders? Would Pennsyl vania have built a line to connect Pittsburg with lines extending to Bal timore and divert traffic from Phila delphia? Would Missouri have con nected Kansas City with lines leading to Chicago at the expense of Saint Louis? Railway Ago. . Siixto or National Ownership. Mr.- Bryan's conclusion that public services should bo owned and man aged by tho public, places him in lino with the progressive democrats that have seen the absurdity of permitting a public service to bo operated for private profit with the expectation that the interests of tho public will be made paramount to the profits of the .private, owners, but his opinion that to avoid -centralization of power the railways should be owned and managed by the several states is a detail of method that ho must soon come to realize is wholly impracticable. The whole tendency In railway management has been and Is toward consolidation. That tho public has benefited by tho consolidation of the small and weak lines into the largo systems, hardly needs demonstration. With consolidation has come a vast improvement in service. Tho traveler may journey for thousands of miles over tho same railway company's tracks without change of cars or de lays. Tho inconvenience that would ' follow should tho management change at each state lino is obvious. Before tho era of centralization, tho tiavelcr going any great distance was obliged to change cars every hundred miles or so, with long waits and great incon venience. At tho present time rival railway companies arrange llielr time sched ules to avoid making connections at junction points, to tho Inconvenience of rthe public. If tho railways of the country should bo placed under the management of tho general govern ment, all this conrusion could be avoided. But to place tho management of tho railways in tho hands of tho several states would bo retrogressive and lead to a species of chaos. The objections to state ownership and man agement are vital. Under ownership by tho general government tho states could build, own and operate purely local lines, in tho event there should be communities needing railway serv ice that the federal lines did not reach, but it would be essential that tho great systems tno tnrough lines and their connections snould be op erated by a single management to avoid confusion. The fear that public ownership would vest in the federal govern ment vast power of a political nature is not unwarranted. Without a strict merit law public ownership would per mit the creation of a powerful politi cal machine, but it is to be assumed that when the American people under take public ownership of the railways they will provide against the danger of turning their operation over to the spoils politicians. There is not the Slightest reason that the men who now manage the railways ror their private owners should not manage them for the public. Why such fear of centralization of power? The power now exists. Would it not be better to have it placed in tho possession of the representatives of the people than to remain in tho keeping of the Rockefellers, Goulds and Morgans? The railway postal service, which at one time was given over to the spoils politicians, has been entirely divorced from politics. Instead of providing for a strict mer it law, would it not have been the height of folly for the general gov ernment to have abdicated its pow er and turned the postal service over to tho several states to avoid cen tralization of power? Milwaukee Wis., Daily News. Not Hungry when you should be means disordered nerves, which, will lead to nervous prostration. Dr. Miles' Nervine is guaranteed to benefit you or money refunded. Book on nerves sent free. - UKMxu MJtDioifc Co.. Elltbart. Iod. A Voice From Tho Past. We made the point last week that, no matter what Mr. Bryan may have been in the past, he had by his declar ation in favor of state ownership of railroads and federal ownership of telegraph lines, ceased to be a demo crat. There were not many corpora tions in Jefferson's day, but there were some. At that time it was also proposed, that the government should control them more directly, and so a bill was once sent to the senate from tho house providing ror the federal incorporation of a certain copper min ing company. It is interesting to re call that the mines were known as "Roosevelt's copper mines," and that they were in New Jersey. Concern ing the plan to incorporate tho con cern by giving it a federal charter, Mr. Jefferson, who was then president, wrote in 1808 to T. J. Randolph thus: "The senate received yesterday a bill from the representatives incor porating a company for Roosevelt's copper mines In Jersey. This is under the sweeping clause of the constitu tion, and supported by the following pedigree of necessities: Congresses are authorided to defend the country; ships aro necessary for that defense; copper is necessary for ships; mines aro necessary to produce copper; com panies aro necessary to work mines and 'this is the house that Jack built.'" Of course, Mr. Bryan ooes not pro pose that the federal government shall incorporate a telegraph company what he demands is that it shall buy out the companies already in posses sion, or build lines, and that In either case it shall be the owner. But in this case, as well as In the case re ferred to by Jefferson, there would be centralization of an extraordinary 2 V, We. aro not areulng against Mr. Bryan's proposition, but Biniply pointing out its extremely un-demo-cratlc and un-Jelfersoman cnaractor. . The same thing is true of his scheme for state ownership of railroads. That Is also a very foolish proposition. The Lake Shore road, for instance, which is now owned by one company, and is operated as a unit, would, under the Bryan plan, be owned by the states of 'New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, In diana and Illinois, and because of this divided ownership, its operation as a unit would be practically impossible. New York could not compel an engi neer hired by it to run his train be yond its own boundary, and Pennsyl vania would be under no obligation to permit such engineer to do so. If he did travel beyond the New York line, which state would pay him the one hiring him, or the one in whose ter ritory he made his run? If the states owned the railroads, they -would also own their rolling stock, and the earn ings of that rolling stock in other states would have to be accounted for to the owning state. If through in terstate commerce were to be main tained at all, we should have such a complicated system of accounts among tho various states as the world has never seen. The only possible alter native to private ownership is federal ownership or control. In the nature of things, the states could not deal with the subject. But considering it from its political point of view, its un-democratic char-, acter must be apparent to all who know anything of democratic princi ple. Think of the power that our gov ernments, state and national, would have if they controlled both the rail roads and the telegraph. In Indiana We should have thousand of new of ficeholdersengineers, firemen, brake men, conductors, section men, clerks, managers and superintendents. Such a political machine could and would be built up as the world has never seen. "The cost of administering btir local governments wouia ue increased many fold. We should lose all the taxes that we now get rrom the rail road and telegraph companies. There would be discrimination in fares and freights to political favorites, and one shudders to think of the proportions that the pass evil would assume. The moment the democratic party should adopt such a policy, it would cease to .be democratic. It may con tinue to exist as an organization, may even show great vigor and vitality, but it will not be the democratic party which the nation has known for more than a century. Here is democracy as defined by Thomas Jef ferson in his first inaugural: "Still one thing more, fellow-citizens, a wis,e and frugal government which shall restrain men from injur ing one another, shall leave them free to regulate their own pursuit of in dustry and . improvement and shall not take from the mouth the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government; and this is neces sary to close the circle of our felic ities." And as if almost foreseeing the time when men should run to the govern ment for protection against abuses and for the cure? of undoubted evils. Mr. Jefferson wrote thus to ar friend: "It has been said that our govern ments, both federal and particular want energy; that it is difficult to re strain both individuals and states from committing wrong. This is true and it is an inconvenience. On the other hand, that energy wmch abso lute governments derive from an armed forco, which is tho effect of the bayonet constantly held at .-tho breast of every citizen, and which re sembles very much the stillness of the grave, must be admitted also to have its inconveniences. We weigh the two together and like best to sub w toFthGJormer- Compare the num ber of wrongs committed with im punity by citizens among us wik thoso committed by the sovereigns n other countries, and the last wUl i found most numerous, most oppress! on the mind, and most degrading I? the dignity of man." aegradlnS of We should bo careful lest we allow present abuses to drive us to the ox tremity of changing tne nature or our government even for the sake of the better coping with tnem. We may here, as in so. many other cases, safelv appeal to the wisdom of the fathers if Jofferson- was a democrat Bryan is www. i.uuiunujjuiis, ina., isews. Sto.t 'Ownership of Railroads. Mr. Bryan has come out in favor of government ownership of railroads This is not surprising in a politician whose tendencies have always been in the direction of socialism. Mr Bryan says tnat he has hitherto re fused to take a position on this sub ject for two reasons; one was that as a candidate of his party in two campaigns, lie did not think it was right for him to take a stand on a subject on which the party had not de clared itself; and the other was that v until recently he had himself not given the subject much study. Now that Mr. Bryan is free from the responsibilities of party leader ship and has given the subject of the government ownership of railroads study, what is the result of his in vestigation? He is not in favor of gov ernment ownership, due or ownership by state governments, not by the fed eral government. He fears the con centration of private control of tho railroads which has gone on through the process of consolidation after con solidation, but he also fears the re sults of the concentration of govern ment control that would result from ownership of the railroads by the United States. In oraer to get rid of tho evil of control ,of4tjhe. railroads of the country concentrated "In a few pri vate individuals, he would have the railroads owned by the people, and in order to get rid of the danger of the railroads concentrated in tho fed eral government, he would have thorn owned by the separate Btates. It would appear to us that Mr. Bry an's study on this subject has been to little purpose. It is possible that Subscribes1 Advertising Deportment A little thought will convince that this department of The Commoner of fers superior advantages to those who desire to secure publicity. Only Commoner-subscribers are allowed to use it, and only responsible articles aro allowed to be advertised. Confidenco in the advertising management will explain in large measure why ad vertising in The Commoner is profit able. The manager is in receipt of many letters from advertisers who have used this department with profit. The rate is the lowest made in th:3 publication 6 cents per word per in sertion, payable in advance. Address all orders to Tho Commoner, Lincoln. Nebraska. VOU COULD SELL OLD LINK LIFE IIhSUR x nncolfyou knew how. Wo tench the art freo of charge and pay you or your "inc. we Birnblo contracts awaiting special and penera ogenta for tho states of Iowa, Missouri Nobro' ka and Kansas. Address L, enre of Commoner WATER PROBLEM SOLVED. MACnWJ W ,or Domestic Well-making. oljenPMf b half, most pructlcal of any. Catalog 10 free. KogerA Sons Mooresburg, lenn. WANTED-GENERAL SALESMEN ON Rj W cently patented well specialties oRJJ , it. boa nn ...nV nnrt nrnonaPS. rilt IUi particulars. Hills &Rosb Co., Medina, im P OR SALE, THREE SMALL FARMS JUOD firm linri and stock locality. Jr"r Correspondence solicited. A. D. uaroau, raragoum, Arkansas. nnnn.T .. r.n T.A-nnwr. VLOUR MILD u'vivovija; n. 01 ," ,1,(1P in a Jf up to date machinery. Steam Pwcm' S gqpd wheat country, at a bargain. lK01, St Company, Real Estate, Cleveland, tt asu. 'ii ; a I 'Jkf s 1. ' , a - !- .vw..f .,n . '