Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-02-13
Mr. Roooan,s defense of His BIN.


Representative Reagan, OF Texas, IS
having a controversy with the LOUISVILLE
Co,,rier-.yolrna respecting his interstate
commerce bill, which is attracting some
attention. The House Committee on COn--
MERGE limited the time for hearing the
railroads in opposition to the bill, and the
Couier-Joaraal sharply criticised the
committee for its action. That journal
thought that the purpose of the committee
was to deprive the railroads of their right
to be heard, and intimated that the bill
was too important ami involved interests
too vast to be hurried through Congress.
1t pointed out the bad effects of previous
hastv legislation respecting railroads, and
suggested that until Congress could de-
monstrate its ability to forfeit I'M
earned land grants and compel the
Pacific railroads to comply Win
their contracts with the government 1t
would be wise to hesitate about passing
laws to control the traffic and travel OF
the great trunk lines of the country. The
Couriey- Journal further insisted that as
the railroads were the most largely inter-
ested in the bill they ought to have been
given all the time they wanted to present
their side of their case. Mr.. Reagan deals
quite exhaustively with the points made
by the Cowier-Joarnal He shows that
this Interstate commerce question has
been before Congress for about ten years,
and has been eXhaustiyely argued in each
Congress by the ablest representatives OF
the railroads. So much time was given to
the railroads that there was not time in
any Congress for the full consideration of
the bill In his opinion, if the railroads
were given unlimited time to address the
committee this Congress they would talk
through this and the next session. In other
words. they would defeat the bill by de-
LAYING it in the committee. The argu-
ments made this session were the argu-
ments previously made. The railroads
had nothing new to say, and, besides,
they had already said far more than the
other vast interests involved IN the bill.
With respect TO the point that the rail
roads were the most largely interested i'll
| the question at issue, Mr.. Regan, III his
letter published last Friday, said:
Let us see whether they are the most
| interested parties in this question. The
| whole Of the railroads. about ll3,0 600 miles,
! represent. including watered stock and
| fictitious capital, a little over S6,0OO, OOO,-
600. Fairly capitalized, to-day, IL would
not exceed $4,000, 00O, 600, or JOO,0OO,00O
in value. There were in the United
States in 1850. 4,00S ,901 farms, OF ,O36 OSl
$40 acres. These farms, farming nipple
ments, live stock, cost of buildings and
repairing. fences and cost of fertilizers,
value of farm productions sold
or consumed. amount to $14,324, S92, $50.
| There were at the same time IN the
| United States 2j3S52 manufacturing es-
! adjustments, with capital stock. amount
| of wages paid during the year, value 81
material and value Of products amount
inc to S12,J04, 629, 14l, aggregatIng So
SIS, 42l. 476. In this aggregate the vast
products Of the mines, the forests, the fish
cries. our shipping, telegraph, express
and banking interests ana DINERS VIII
swell that aggregate by several billions OF
dollars worth. Besides this 1t IS estl-
mated that the internal commerce
of the United States amounts to
about $50, 600 100000 a year. why was
it assumed that the railroads are
more interested in the question of
transportation than fifty odd millions of
American people, the owners OF all the
billions worth above referred to? Let US
See. therefore. what interest the owners
Of the S26. 600. 900, 900 worth of the vast
products of the field, the farm, the or
chard. the mines, the manufactures, etc,
of the United states have that are carried
by railroads. The highest interest the
railroads could probably have in these
would not exceed , or per cent. The
other 81 or rs per cent. of the value OF all
these articles of transportation over rail-
roads belongs to other people than the
railroads, whose interest in this question
bears the proportion to the interest oil the
railroads that 81 bears to or per cent
These figures are worth preserving. Mr..
Reagan has given this subject more study
than any other man in the country, and
his figures are to be relied on. In dis
cussing the State Commission we have
doubted the ACCESSIBILITY of giving COM
mission the right TO fix traffic charges.
The right to prevent railroads from max
ing determinations, however, is another
matter. The railroads have it in their
power to break down or build up an in
dustry, or to make one man or one
company prosper at the ex-
pense of others. The vast
industrial wealth of the country is almost
at their mercy. 1t may be argued that 1t
is not to the interest of a railroad to ruin
any mans business or to check any in
dustrv, and it is not reasonable to suppose
that it would do what is contrary to its in
terest. To answer this it is only neces-
sary to repeat the history of the Standard
Oil Company. 1t seems that the railroads
did combine TO make that company rich
and powerful and enabled it to crush out
its rivals. There are other like histories
that might be repeated. Still, the question
which the Courier-,JOuRdI raises remains
unanswered, viz: whether after law
such as Mr.. Reagan proposes is passed 1t
can be enforced.