mpyiiu imniiii i
SEPTEMBER 15, 1905
The Commoner.
7
tioned, or 4,325 trains of forty cars each. The
estimate for corn is 796,000 car loads or 19,900
train loads of forty cars each. On top of this then
probably willbe 17,000 car loads of flaxseed to
be hauled from the northwest. To haul the 1,-
500,000 cars estimated for all kinds of grain, there
would be a movement of a hundred trains of forty
cars each for every day of the year.
REPRESENTATIVES of the Santa Fe railroad
announce that they have made a canvas in
the west and southwest states and territories
with reference to the proposed rate legislation,
for the purpose of ascertaining the sentiments
of shippers and business men generally. They
declare that while the canvass is still in pro
gress, "remarkable results" have been secured
and that fully 70 per cent of the shippers inter
viewed have declared themselves to be opposed
to the proposed railroad legislation.
THE question propounded by the Santa Fe is in
form as follows: "Do you favor giving the
interstate commerce commission the absolute
power to fix all interstate rates and to establish
the relation of rates between all localities?" Re
ferring to the Santa Fe's canvas, the Chicago
Record-Herald says: "We do not wonder at the
fact that 70 per cent of the interviewed men of
affairs gave an emphatic 'No' as their answer..
The wonder is rather that the other 30 per cent
answered 'Yes.' No one wants to grant the com
mission 'absolute power' to fix 'all' interstate
rates and to establish rate relations between lo
calities. No one favors anything so drastic,
sweeping and radical. It Is merely proposed to
give the commission power to prescribe a rea
sonable rate for future observance where a cer
tain rate complained of specifically has been care
fully inquired into and found excessive. The
decision, moreover, is not to be final. An appeal
to the courts is provided for in the proposal be
fore the country."
REFERRING to an editorial recently printed
in The Commoner, a Minneapolis, Minn.,
reader, writes: "Upon taking up our copy of
your paper today, I saw and read your article
with the title 'Enough.' You close with the hope
than 'an increasing number jot the weli-to-do will
say "enough," and then devote themselves to
altruistic effort.' A few years ago, Mr. Otto
.Young gave $75,000 for building an addition 'to
the Chicago home for incurables for the use of
those inmates afflicted with tuberculosis. It is
my understanding that this fine building is in
tended as a memorial to a son who died of that
disease. I think you will agree with me that a
fitter one could hardly' be devised. At Christmas
of each year each inmate of the entire institu
tion receives a $5 gold piece Trom Mr. Young.
You may not know of these facts, which seem
to indicate that Mr. Young is devoting himself to
'altruistic effort.' I might not know them my
self, were I not intimately related to an inmate
and therefore an occasional visitor to the home."
A
MOVEMENT has been set on foot by the
x jl commissioners or tne Jjistrict or uoium-
bit for the purpose of changing inauguration day
from March 4 to April 30. Forty-one governors
of states and territories have agreed to serve
on the committee to advocate the passage and
the adoption of a constitutional amendment, pro
viding for the change referred to and it is said
that it may bo possible to secure the adoption
of this amendment so that the 1909 Inauguration
will occur on the new date. Commenting on this
proposition, the Pittsburg Dispatch says: "The
large number of state executives who have by
their consent approved the change indicates the
general and probably unanimous assent to the
idea and shows that the only reason why it has
not been already carried out is simply the diffi
culty of amending an established custom. The
machinery of constitutional amendment is cumb
rous and is required only to remove all doubts.
There is no more than an Inference of constitu
tional requirement that the inauguration shall
be on March '4, but the provision that the presi
dent shall serve for four years raises a doubt
as to the validity of executive acts during the
fifty-seven days that would intervene when the
change was made. If the four-year rule had been
strictly adhered to from the first the change would
not be needed, since Washington's first inaugu
ration was on April 30. But his second term ap
propriated those fifty-seven days from his first,
so that all subsequent terms began and ended
on March 4. If the amendment is not secured
it is pertinent to note that the purpose could
be partially attained by omitting the public ad-
dress of the now president from the stops of
the capitol. There is absolutely no legal re
quirement that the president after taking the oath
of offlce shall go into the open air and, gonerally
in Inclement weather, deliver a long address on
public questions. But as custom has ordained
this function it is likely that it will bo continued,
which makes the necessity of a more propitious
season additionally strong. While congress is
about the amendment It should see to it that
another clause is framed providing how the gov
ernment shall bo conducted in case of the death
of both president and vice president-elect in the
interval between their formal election and thoir
inauguration. That Is one of the contingencies
now wholly unprovided for."
WHILE giving to President Roosevelt all due
credit for successfully inducing the late
beligerents to make peace, the Pittsburg Dispatch
says that enthusiasm must not bo "overdone."
Somo have suggested that Mr. Roosevelt's success
as a peacemaker may make it impossible for him
to avoid a third term in the White House, but
the Dispatch says that considerations which gov
ern the popular choice will be those which di
rectly affect the peoplo of the United States
rather than foreign lands, adding: "The
achievements which may make President Roose
velt so essential to the welfare of the people of
the United States that they will be unwilling to
accept any substitute are likely to be more diffi
culfc than securing peace between Japan and Rus
sia. It has been shown that he was able to in
duce those foreign governments, already feling
the strain of a vast and costly war, to accede to
the unanimous wish of the world and come to
terms. But so far ho has been unable to sccuro
measures needed for the welfare of the peoplo
against the Interests of corporate combination
and the inertia of senatorial privilege. He has
striven with energy and generally with good
faith, saving such lapses as in tne Morton case.
Perhaps his prestige as an international states
man may enable him to renew the attack on
trusts, railroad abuses and political jobbery with
greater force than ever. But it is not to be ig
nored that the crucial and most trying test of
his statesmanship in that struggle is still pend
ing. The president who can bring corporate priv
ilege and political corruption into subordination
to the law will win a greater and more vital vic
tory than when he induces two foreign powers
to cease bloodshed. It is not be7fUHng the credit
due a successful intermediary to recognize tho
probability that the criterion in 1908 Is more like
ly to be what the candidates have done or will
do for the United States than what they have
done or will do for foreign nations."
AMERICAN newspapers have made compari
sons on tho number of deaths by railroad
accident in tho United States and Great Britain.
A writer in Iho Minneapolis Tribune says that
the figures are often given without oincial autho
rity for them and that they have frequently been
challenged by railroad managers who "are often
able to furnish statistics equally without official
authority which show that the cases of Ameri
can over British railroads deaths is much less
than the popular notion."
ADMITTING that statistics of this character
should not be given without sufllcient ofll
cial authority for them, the Providence Rhode
Island Telegram says: "We find in several pa
pers a report to the state department from the
American consul at Nottingham, an English rail
road center, giving from official sources the deaths
caused in the year 1904 on tho British railroads.
Comparison is easy between these and the offi
cial statistics of American casualties published
by the interstate commerce commission. Lot us
give the bare figures. In Great Britain one
passenger in nearly 200,000,000 was killed; in
America one out of every 1,G00,000, about 125
times as many. The relative proportion of in
jured is only half as many for the United States.
This looks better, unless we consider that the
British only injure in many cases where we kill
outright. The proportion against us is lower in
the case of employes, but bad enough. We killed
632 against 7 in Great Britain, and injured 67,067
against 114 In Great Britain. We have seventeen
times as many employes as they, but we killed
six hundred times as many. We killed nearly
6 000 and injured nearly 8,000, neither passengers
nor employes, on tracks and grade crossings.
The British have no statistics for accidents of
this class, having all but abolished them. Prob
ably the direct causes of the lower British death
rate are universal absence of grade crossings
and exclusion of trespassers from tracks, uni-
vorsal use of tho block system, larger nno of
double tracks and safety appliances, more efficient
patrolling of tracks and greater care In operating
trains. SVith far Iohb mileage, a donser popula
tion and higher nverago rales, It Is much easier
for the British roads to take those precautions
than the Americans. But evory one of them will
come into universal uho In the Unjtud States
whon we shall have loarned to value human Ufa,
In comparison with dividends and accumulated
capital of money, as highly as it Is valued in
Groat Britain."
STRANGELY in contrast with Mr. Roofs opin
ion of Mr. Roosevelt, as doacrlbed by Henry
Loomis Nelson, is Mr. RoobgvgII'h opinion of
Mr. Root, ns expressed by the president In a
speech delivered nearly two year aso. On that
occasion Mr. Roosevelt said: "In John Hay I
have a groat secretary of state. In Philander
Knox I have a great attorney general. In other
cabinet posts I have groat men. Ellhu Root could
take any of these places and fill it ax well as the
man who is now there. And, In addition, he is
what probably none of these gentlemen could be,
a groat secretary of war. Ellhu Root is tho
ablcot man I havo known in our government
service. I will go further. Ho Is tho greatest
man that has appeared In the public life of any
country, in any position, on either side of the
ocean, in my time."
BISMARCK and Gladstone lived during Mr.
Roosevelt's time, and on our own side of tho
ocean were a few men who were regarded as
"great." according to tho ohl-fashioncd notion.
Lincoln lived during Mr. Roosevelt's time, and
our country's history tells of many other men
with whom tho ordinary man would hardly think
of comparing Mr. Roosevelt's present secretary
of state.
ONE of Secretary Bonaparte's first official acts
was to undo some work done by his pre
decessor, Paul Morton, in the matter of what is
known as "tho Charleston navy scandal." A
writer in The Nation says: "Tho facts are per
fectly clear. Two young civil engineers, W. G.
Walker and F. R. Harris, made it very uncomfort
able for the New York Continental Jewel Filtra
tion company by insisting that its work at the
navy yard be up to the contract standard. Sec
retary Bonaparte is satisfied that the company
finally went to work to secure the removal,
through political influenco, of these vigilant in
spectors, apparently taking the groundwith
many another contractor that government work
may be just what you please to make It, When
the political Influence reached that master of
railroad rebates, Paul Morton, he at once ac
quiesced in the company's wishes and Issued an
order removing Lieutenants Harris and Walker
from their posts and transferring them elsewhere.
Mr. Morton thus served notice on the entire navy
that when it came to standing by honest in
spectors or easy-going contractors the latter had
tho support of the department. Secretary Bona
parte at once perceived what a demoralizing
effect upon tho whole navy this action would
have, and has now promptly reversed It in an
opinion which should make Paul Morton hang
his head, and President Roosevelt wish that he
had not been so hasty in adjusting wings and a
halo to his beloved, but not regretted, ex-secretary
of the navy."
THE NUMBER of railway passengers killed in
accidents in 1904 was 441; In 19903, 321; In
1!02, 303; in 1901, 282; in 1900, 219. Referring to
these figures, the Chicago Record Herald says.
"The Increase in 1904 over 1903 was 37 per cent.
The increase in 1903 over 1900 was only 29 per
cent all told. For casualties to passengers that
did not result in death the rate of increase last
year was not so alarming, but still it was
very high. The figures are 9,111 cas
ualties for 1904, ,0973 for 1903, 6,089 for 1902,
4.988 for 1901 and 4,128 for 1900. This shows an
increase of 331 per cent for 1904 over 1903, as
against an increase of 69 per cent for 1903 over
1900. The increase in the number of passengers ,
carried by the roads is trivial as compared with
the increase In accidents. For 1904 over 1903
the increase in passengers was less than 3 per
cent. Comparisons between American railroads
and foreign railroads are very unfavorable to tho
former, and many explanations are offered by rail
road managers. The general explanations are not
in point, however, in view of the figures above
given. What is needed is an explanation of the
rapid rate of increase in the death list last year.
The best way for the railroads to give such an
explanation is by practical measures for putting
an end to tho slaughter."