The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1889-02-26
MONOPOLY AGAINST THE
PEOPLE.
Legislators, Do Your Duty.

A FAVORITE argument with the
IN opponents of a Railroad Commits
MON in our State is that the charters
of the older roads prohibit any inter
ference with the rates of freights and
tariffs, and that the Commission could
emily control those of the new roads in
the State. The friends and represen-
tatives of these old roads assert this
with such a triumphant air of conf
dence, that one might be led to believe
that they were perfectly Indifferent as
10 the action of the Legislature on the
pending bill.
We were much interested in read
ing a carefully prepared argument
from the pen of Mr.. J.. W. Hinsdale,
one of the ablest and most thoroughly
equipped lawyers in our State, and
whom we presume is an attorney for
0ne or more of these roads, and which,
according to his argument, cannot be
effected by the proposed Commission.
But the activity, vigilance and zeal
With which the representatives of
these roads resist the passage of the
Bill to say the least of it, is very sig
nifcant and suggestive. If by the
terms of their charters they are so
securely shielded against interference
by a Commission, as they claim, why
Is it. that they are ever present before
the Committee on the Commission, to
resist it ? Why are they so faithful,
50 constant and so untiring in, the
lobby? Why are they crowding the
columns of newspapers with arguments
10 prove that their roads cannot be
affected by the Commission? Why
should they be the least concerned, if
this be true? According to- their
argument they are safe, then why be
disturbed at all? We say hat the
attitude of these roads towards this
bill is very suggestive. 1t may be
that a faithful and energetic Commits
sion might, after all, find some way to
force these roads to act fairly by the
people. 1t may be that in the inves
LEGATIONS of charters and their require
ments, some important omissions might
be developed on the part of the roads.
1t may be that the "vested rights of
which we hear so much, might not
exist in all cases. 1t may be that a
Commission might take it into it's
head to look into the Uatues a0hach are
a11oHe under on laa0s and fnd that
heGUaly "Watered stocks" had submerged
,kelpleSS TAG collectors. Or, after all, it
may be that these old and strong
roads, conscious of their security, and
moved by sympathy for the new roads
have magnanimously espoused their
cause and are simply interested on
1ear behalf, But it is wonderful to
see how hard and how earnestly and
how anxiously men work against a
law which they say cannot possibly
touch their interests Do they see "a
niger in the wood-pile 2"
But Mr.. Hinsdale goes further in
his labored argument. He not only
proves to his entire satisfaction that
our Legislature cannot give the power
to a Commission to control freights
and tariffs on our roads, but he points
ussto the admirable systems (which
are adopted in Mass, and all the New
England and several of the Western
States, and which have proved SO
beneficial and which owe their success
to the fact that they do not grant such
power 7" Such is the soothing Ian.
guage of Mr.. Hinsdale. But why
does he go SO far away from home
and to a people whose industrial,
social and commercial conditions and
necessities are so widely different from
Ours2 Why does he choose to select
such States and such conditions and
no point us to the systems which do
not control freights and tarifs2 Why