Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-04-29

avoided by resort to platitudes concerning
sovereign power, the dangers of aggregated
capital in corporate form to the public
welfare, etc. 1t is probable that the full
text of the speech will disclose considera-
ton of the answers usually made and an
analysis of their errors. Continuing,
the Senator said, in reference to the ques-
ton Of the right to regulate railway fares
and freights in a manner that would, of
necessity, impair the earning capacity of
the roads:
We should not forget that the investments
were made by individuals. If railways were so
important to the public, surely these individual
investors ought not to be discouraged by the APP
prehension that the value of the investments
might be lessened by adverse legislation Be
sides, inasmuch as labor entered very largely
into the construction OF railways, and con
tinued in their operation, any attempt on the
part of Congress to fix the rate of railway com
pensation was to fix the price of labor
And this very important and vital factor
in the question is one that is generally
overlooked, or if considered by the advo-
Gates of such measures, is invariably
lightly treated. We are told that the SEN
ator declared that in no effort to regulate
had he found any guarantee provided
against the impairment of income.
If legislation interfered to decrease the in
come value OF the property, it was affected to
the extent of the diminution of the income
rms was taking property without compensa-
ton-lt was confscation. There never had
been bill introduced into any Legislature
N Lot oil
the owners of the roads did not find occasion to
protest, on the ground that il diminished the
income -prooucing quality of their property
Now, being legitimate and desirable as was
established by the exercise of eminent domain.
not III behalf Of the railroad company-for the
State had no right to do that-but in behalf of
the people; and the State being justified in re-
garding railroads as public benefits, why should
they alter completion have less protection from
| the laws than other property or why should
they be made the object of direct and injurious
legislation Railroads had no legal monopoly
ileges
Yet there is no term more abused in its
application and much use, than this of
monopoly" as applied to railroad car
riers. Indeed, if false Interpretation, mis-
conception and Misrepresentation of the
true status of railway business can abso-
iutely change the original meaning of
word, it will be found in this case. This is
due to the fact that the railroad question.
as to the nature of its traffic and the con-
ditions under which it is maintained. and
the intricacies and difficulties that attach
TO ii, were not, in the early era of railroad
building understood by the general public,
and while public comprehension of the
subject has greatly broadened in recent
years, it is by no means yet wholly clear
or adequate. We recall that Governor
Stanford many years ago enunciated and
fortified principles correspondent to those
that marked his speech in the Senate this
week, upon this vital topic of diminution
of income and earning capacity by in.
furious hostile legislation affecting prop
erty values, that amounts to the with
drawal of the protection that is supposed
to be guaranteed to all who possess.
If it is. said that these questions, so far
as the power of government is concerned,
are settled, there remains still the greater
moral question Of the justice and wisdom
of its exercise. Said Governor Stanford
The bill under consideration practically de-
MED to the various railroad companies the right
CT competition. 1t precluded shippers from reap
ing their right to the advantage of competition
and cause railway companies an actual loss
II low rate for longer distance meant a re-
duction for short ones. carriers must submit to
loss from the usual rates on shorter distances.
or else abandon the business at competing
points. Under the force of competition carriers
were often compelled to take business over
their roads long distance at Il lower rate than
they would receive for shorter distances No
railway company would do this if the rate to be
charged was matter outside of its control
| For this reason rates are down below the aver
age cost of transportation, and freight is often
moved at less than the average cost Low
rates, if they paid anything above the direct ex-
| penses consequent upon the movement aided
| to sustain the railways and better enabled them
| 10 move the traffic at non-competing points
| Railway companies could not ignore the various
| circumstances that established competition
much OF which depended on the geographical
| condition OF the country The shipper for a
| snort distance was not charged more but the
| shipper for long distance was Charged less
| because the carriers could not help themselves
NO legitimate enterprise should be discouraged
| least of all those that added most to the conyen,
fence and comfort of the people, and to the
| wealth, strength and dignity of the nation.