New-York tribune., 1873-02-03

Almost all the cOntinenta Europca" nae'on9
have succeeded in regulating their railroads
somewhat after the manner we are now try
ing to do This, however, they have never
succeeded in doing through the efficacy of any
legislation. The result has been accomplished
through the machinery of the executive almost
exclusively, and in consequence OF an amount
of executive interference which wou'd pe
wholly inconsistent with the theory OF prac-
tice of our institutions. The Minister OF fuD-
lie Works in Prussia, in France, and III Der
GUM, is the principal Railroad Director IN each
of those countries. The legislative depart
ment has almost nothing to do with the mat
ter. The laws are of the vaguest and most
general description the government super
vision under them is most minute. The oppo-
site system has been pursued in Great Britain,
AZ it has been here The attempt after each
failure has been to make new laws more cir
cumstantial, more adapted to meet every con-
tingency that could arise, and which the old
laws bad failed to cover. The result which
might have been expected. naturally followed.
The more complicated the law, the more
utter and complete its failure. The stupdest
of railroad managers drove his locomotives
through them with as much ease as chancery
lawyer evades an act of Parliament. The more
intricate they became the less executOry force
the laws had /; and so it has proved, and so it
will prove even TO the end of the chapter.
What is the remedy for this diflicultyf 1t
certainly will not be found in more legisla-
ton. The longer our people blunder on in
that path the further they will be from the
desired goal. Yet somehow relief must be
ol,t Uho Of ntry
| forever be dependent for such an absolute
| necessity of life as cheap and regular trans
pOrtation on the mercy of such bands OF
| thieves as are fast obtaining control of our
| railroads. The Massachusetts, Commissioners
| do not deny or seek to palliate the exigency.
| On the contrary they meet it very squarely.
| They recommend the State of Massachusetts
| to possess itself by purchase of one OF Its
leading lines of railroads and to boldly enter
into the railroad business itself; through the
public management of one portion of its railroad
system controlling, without recourse to legis-
| lation or to Government supervision, all the
rest of it, This is the system which has been
80 successfully pursued in Belgium, and an
| account of the experience of that country
with its railroads is not the least interesting
part of the Commissioners report.
We are not prepared to say that it may not
| come to this-we are not, however, prepared
| to come to it just yet. There Is less
radical remedy which we should like to see
| tried first. Laws, no matter how carefully
drawn, have failed to regulate our railroad
system in the interests of the public. This is
| true. Why, however, have they failedi
! Evidently for the reason stated by the Mas
| sachusetts Commissioners because they would
| not adapt themselves to the infinitely varying
| conditions of a living growing, complex
system They were hard, unyielding unadapt-
| able. They failed, in single word, because
they did not have a man inside of them.
| They lacked the essential element of success
| which was supplied in the systems of con-
| tinental Europe. The effort of our Legis-
latures should apparently be, then, not to pass
| new and more intricate laws to supply the
deficiencies of laws already too intricate. If
they attempt this they viii only foundor
deeper and deeper in the mire. On the
contrary, they should pass laws of the simplest
and most general character and they should
| provide for their execution by cOnfding
broad, discretionary power in the hands of
competent men. A system of Independent,
permanent railroad tribunals must be called into
| existence, of which, possibly, such Commissions
! as those of Massachusetts, and of Illinois may be
| the earlier germs. These bodies must be
| clothed with power both executive and ju-
| dicia in its nature, and they must exercise
close supervision over the railroad corpora
tions There are apparently but two alterna-
| tives to this course. That proposed by the
Massachusetts, Commissioners, in the entire or
partial assumption of the railroads by the
| State; or, Oh the other hand, a final and
| complcte return to the policy of nOn-inter-
| ference. The State must go into the railroad
| business, or the community must lay down
and fold its hands i'll patient resignation. Be-
| fore choosing either horn Of this dilemma, we
| want to see fair trial given to the simple
| law-and- tribunal system. Wehave had enough
of intricate legislation supplemented by impo-
tent Commissions now let some enterpIisng
Legislature, by way of variety, give us a SIM
pie law with thinking being inside of it.
Meantime is there not one thing which it
is always in order to do7 Why not abolish
special charters for railroads, and this perpet-
| ual hindering influence oflegslatiOn, which turns
over whole States like New-Jersey, bound hand
| and foot, to the control of some gigantic
monopolys Why not let any corporati2h con,
struct railroad anywhere, provided it has the
money! Let it be restrained only by suitable
provisions for the payment of right of way honest
organization. etc. Let there be general rail-
road law, just as there is a general mining and
manufacturing law, and leave the rest to that
same free competition which settles prices and
destroys monopolies in other branches of busi-
ness.
THE PROSPECT At SAMAN4.
Private advices from the West Indies warn