Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1889-04-04

President Miller called Inc colossal fault
of the bill, but as | have said. this OBJ
| lection is now entirely removed.
The next greatest objection urged to
| the bill is that it prohibits charging
more there can he charged just the
same, mind you) for a shorter than
| longer distance over the same line in the
same direction. 1t is amazing that any
man can be found who viii deny the cor
rectness of this proposition. But it is
said that there may be exceptions to
| this rule. Well, if there is, they are
| provided for in the bill If in any case
the roads can show that this section
works hardship, they can be relieved
! from its operations. But the exceptions
viii be rare. Can you scarcely imagine
a case where it is cheaper and easier to
! go two miles than one, whether on foot.
| horseback, or by train. What should we
| think Of laborer who should ask more
for one days work than for two-a farm
er who should demand more for half a
! load of wheat than for full load-a
manufacturer charging more for one
machine than for greater number? It
seems almost absurd to talk about it.
1t costs something to run cars Every
| turn of wheel is an added expense.
And yet the railroads want to charge
more for fifty miles than for one hun
| dred, and are to-day carrying freights
| through our state more than 400 miles
for the same or less than they charge
you and / in this state for 100 miles 1t
| was this outrageous system of discrimi-
nation that caused the insertion of the
long and short haul section in the
interstate commerce act. Why, along
| the line of the road on which
| ern, men and villages and cities
have been ruined, because. owing to dis
ordinations against them they could
not compete with the great centers of
| Minneapolis and ST. Paul. The inter
state law has corrected many of these
| abuses, and aided, beyond computation,
! the producers and small shippers and
| traders at interior points. Many of the
| heavy shippers, especially in the larger
places, complain of this, and you must
| know why. It is because they are given
| and I hear it intimated that some of
! them are given now, special rates and
rebates, and other favors the general
public do not enjoy. This is why they
opposed the interstate law, and why
they oppose this bill, both of which for
bid drawbacks and rebates, special rates
and unjust determinations. There is
where these circumstances and resolu-
! tions come from, from men and compa-
| MES that have received in the past, and
| hope to receive in the future, special ia
vors at the hands of railroad companies
! Why said Judge Howe, do you sup
! pose these great concerns, like J. [. Case
& Co., for instance, are afraid of the rail
roads?' No. That's not what's the mat
ter. The railroads are afraid of them,
and want the privilege, unhirdered by
law, of giving them any favors they
| please, so as to control their trade.
"To hear the railroad attorneys and
| lobbyists talk one would think this
long and short haul section was
some new idea, some dastardly
scheme to wreck the railroads and
ruin the people. Yet, as amatter of fact,
it is a copy, word for word, of the inter
state act,-a law framed after more
study and with greater care than any
other law on our national statute books.
A committee of the United States SEN
ate, composed of the ablest men and
most learned lawyers in the nation,
spent nine months in taking testimony
from all classes of business men in every
|
law as embodying the ripest experience
and highest wisdom of the country on
the railroad question. 1t was passed al
most unanimously through both houses
of congress. 1t received the vote of
every member and both senators from
this state. Our junior senator told me
me just before this legislature met, when
he was last in Wisconsin, that If a bill
was introduced to repeal the Interstate
commerce law that it would not get two
votes in the senate of the United States.
| And yet railroad attorneys, favored ship
pers and weakened legislators tell US
it is an outrage to offer bill with such
provision in it, and that if passed it
would bring disaster alike upon the
railroads and the public. Don't you be-
lieve it. It is not true. Senators, let
US not be deceived by such idle talk.
Let us stand like men on our feet and
look this question squarely in the face.
SIN the consideration of any matter,
be it public or private, it is the part of
wisdom to consult the experiences OF
others. So let us now, as this great
question confronts us, the correct solu-
ton of which we all earnestly desire to
see, look at what other legislatures have
done, and see if we can safely follow in
their footsteps. | will quote very briefly
a few extracts from late reports Of the
railroad commissioners in several of the
more important states, both in the east,
west and south. OF Illinois [ have al
ready spoken. In Massach usetts the
law mas worked to the satisfaction of all.
The United States senate committee
says: In conclusion, it may be said that
the committee made special effort, by
inquiries among all classes of the COM
munity, to ascertain the popular judg-
ment in Massachusetts as to the work
ing of the commission, and that not a
whisper of complaint against its meth
DDS was heard, nor was there found any
indication of dissatisfaction in that state
with the operation or results of the ex-
listing system The commission in Mas
sachusetts is the same as proposed in
this bill
The following is the report from New
| York: During it's brief existence the
| commission has been called upon to deal
with important questions affecting the
| great commercial interest Of the Empire
| state The illustrations that have been
! given of the results acc m DliShed war
rant the conclusion that b ) interests OF
the people are better protected than
they were before the creation of the
commission, and that substantial and
satisfactory progress has already been
made under the existing system towards
the effective regulation of the railroads
Of New York
Here is what the commissioners OF
Georgia say: we think that it can be
justly claimed that fair and impartial
review of the work Of the commission in
carrying out the purposes of the law by
a reduction and equalization of the