.
a *
'JW'
Conservative. i 9 ;
cases which could be looked after just
as well by the courts , or why give it
more pownr , merely to keep it busy ?
The Hawkeye says :
"In April Inst the senate adopted a
resolution asking the interstate coin-
_ , , . , , , , inerce commission
. .
Complaints Mostly . . . .
Trifling. * ° furnish the sen
ate with a state
ment of the number of complaints made
against the railroads of the country
during certain periods. The commission
has made its report , senate document
No. 819. The report shows that the
number of complaints , oral and written ,
big and little , is about 1,400 annually ,
but many of them are trifling , and most
of them are disposed of by the commis
sion without any formal hearing. In
the ten years , * from April 16 , 1890 , to
April 16 , 1900 , there were only 180 com
plaints of importance enough to justify
formal hearings ; that is to say , an aver
age of eighteen cases a year. In the
face of such facts it is not probable that
congress will give more power to the
commission merely for the sake of keep
ing that body busy.
"Considering that there are many mil
lions of interstate freight shipments
. , , , , . . every year , and an
Abolish tlio
commission. average of only
eighteen corn-
plaints serious enough to require formal
hearings , the question ought to be , why
continue the commerce commission at
all ? Why should the country pay
$250,000 a year ( which is about what the
commission costs ) , to look after eighteen
complaints against the railroads , which
the courts could deal with just as well
without the commission ?
"The report shows that of the 180
cases in ten years , 35 were taken into
the courts from the commission , so the
commission itself decided only 145 cases
in ten years , or an average of 14) cases
a year , besides the trivial matters which
were of little importance , and which
could , and no doubt would , have been
adjusted , if there were no commission
in existence. "
GERMAN RETALIATION.
It must be admitted that we in this
country are not in a position to com
plain at this imperial restriction upon
our trade. In consequence of our tariff
impositions , we have so far prevented
the access of German products to our
market that the sales of German goods
in the United States for the last year or
two have been considerably smaller
than they were ten years ago. It was
the endeavor of those who framed the
present tariff law to put every possible
obstacle in the way of the entrance into
this country of goods of German manu
facture. On the other hand , our sales
in Germany have steadily increased ,
and during the last fiscal year were
nearly twice as large as they were ten
years ago.
It is not strange , in view of these
conditions , that German manufacturers
and those representing them in the
reichstag are not stirring themselves as
energetically as they might to prevent
the passage of this restrictive law. We
have done what we could to spoil their
trade in this country , and , if it had not
been that they realized that their
operatives will be compelled to pay
more for their food supplies , we do not
believe they would have lifted their
hands to resist the adoption , of a law
which strikes a blow at the American
export trade. The great increase of
our German sales and the entire absence
of increase in our German purchases
indicate that conditions of exchange are
much more favorable to us in Germany
than those which we accord to German
merchants ; hence , if it were not for
personal losses , all of the Germans
would , doubtless , be only too well
pleased to administer to us a dose of our
own medicine.
This action of the German reiohstag
is a symptom of a popular sentiment in
Europe which it would be well for those
who are to shape the policy of this
country for the next few years to
seriously take into account. Our pro
tection policy is making for us enemies
all over the world , and doing this at a
time when , in consequence of our ex
panded industrial resources , we are
greatly in need of finding foreign mar
kets wherever we can secure them. If
we had a tariff for revenue only , giving
to all people generous opportunities to
trade with us , there cannot be the least
doubt that many of the proposed limita
tions upon our export trade would never
be thought of. We should then have
in all of the great countries of the
world a large number of trade friends ,
who would insist that our readiness to
buy should be reciprocated by ample
opportunities to sell. As it is , it is by
no means unlikely that the early years
of the coming century will bring with
them a movement to unite the govern
ments of Europe in an effort to shut
out the entrance into their ports of
merchandise of American manufacture ,
and this movement will be welcomed
by those who might readily have been
made our friends because of their desire
to retaliate upon us for the restrictions
which we have imposed upon them
Boston Herald.
T1IE FREMONT MYTH.
THE CONSERVATIVE has commented
once or twice on a peculiar tendency
among amateurs of western history to
give Captain John O. Fremont credit
for nearly everything that happened in
this part of the country prior to about
1850. This is brought to mind again by
a statement noticed in a recent book ,
which is so attractive that one is very
reluctant to have suspicions of its
accuracy aroused Col. Henry Inman's
"Groat Salt Lake Trail. " On page 218
of this work appears a foot-note ( which
may therefore not bo Colonel Inman's )
referring to the Smoky Hill Fork of the
Republican River , and saying "this
stream was named by Fremont on his
second expedition of exploration to the
regions of the then unknown 'Far
West. ' "
This is so utterly incorrect , and comes
apparently from so high authority , that
it illustrates very well the exasperating
nature of these Fremont legends. As a
matter of fact , most of the features of
western topography bore their present
names before Captain Fremont was
born. In this case , both the Republican
and its "Smokeyhill" Fork were found
bearing those names by Captain Pike
when ho crossed to the mountains in
1806 , and so appear both in his journal
and on his maps. Colonel Inman's error
may perhaps have arisen from a hasty
reading of a passage in Fremont's record
of his second journey , wherein ho speaks
of coming upon "a large stream , after
ward known to be the Republican fork
of the Kansas. " Read this "afterward
known as" and the error is accountable.
Considering that this belief in the
Pathfinder has grown in fifty years to
the present point ( where even the State
Historical Society gives publicity to
mention of him as "the first white man
known to have crossed the plains" ) , one
must expect to see him regarded in
another half-century as little less than
the creator of the western portion of
this continent. This extravagant popu
lar estimation may very likely have had
its root in reckless advertisement of his
prowess and exploits during his candi
dacy for the presidency in 1856. It does
not appear from his own accounts of his
travels that he was conspicuously arro
gant in such matters. On surmounting
the comparatively modest prominence
in the Wind River Mountains , since
very properly known as Fremont's Peak ,
he recorded in his journal , "it is pre
sumed that this is the highest peak of
the Rocky Mountains , " but this was
natural enough , if not exactly self-
obliterate. In describing Independence
Rook he devotes quite a little space to
the large cross which he engraved upon
that ancient autograph-album of the
plains , "as a symbol of the Christian
faith , " but makes no mention of the
letters I. H. S. which Father Desmet
had inscribed thereon some years before.
But such little characteristics need not
forbid our supposing that his present
posthumous greatness has been in a great
measure thrust upon him.
A. T. RICHARDSON.
WOULD DECEIVE NO ONE.
To repudiate the Chicago platform
and nominate Bryan would bo like
pushing Satan out of the front door to
bring him. in again at the back door.
It would deceive nobody. Philadelphia
Record ( dem. ) .
