The Goodland republic. [volume] (Goodland, Kan.) 1891-1907, 1894-06-01
GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP.

|
-
GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP.
Objections to government ownership
of railroads considered by D. L. Seely,
in the Bmffalo N. " Advocate.
First-There is no law for it. The
answer to this is: Railroads are public
highways, and should be under full
control of the government. When the
roads were built the lands were usually
condemned under the law of eminent
domain" Surely what the law took
from the people it can restore, but we
propose to pay a fair price for the
property, to be assessed by law.
Second-They would cost too much.
No man loses anything by purchasing
good property, especially if that prop
erty is injuring him. No tax would
have to be laid on the people to pay
for the road in full. Legal tender
treasury notes should be issued, direct
from the treasury, to pay for them,
thus increasing our circulating medium
of exchange without taxing anybody.
10y OpO1 cSG41ASs O11O 4OcbS4S OEO11 a OclS4o
which would yield 4 per cent upon
their actual value, we would save $780,
100000 per year IN freights; and yet
accumulate fund in the treasury
which would soon pay the price of the
property.
Third is paternalism. Not more
so than the post-office department or
the coming of money is. When a
power becomes dangerous to the life of
the republic, the republic mast subor-
dinate that power or die. This is the
situation today.
Fourth-Persons injured by train
viii have no redress. This is not true,
and if it we're, the jurisdiction of the
court of claims can be extended to en-
brace such issues. There need be no
trouble whatever on that point.
Fifth-It will put the roads into
politics. Where are they now? Wous.a
to God we could say they are not in
politics now, controlling, corrupting
and enslaving the people! By sub
stituting government ownership, we
take away the motive for plundering
the people, and the crime will die with
the motive. If the people are capable
OF self government, they can be trusted
with the railroads Civil-service re-
form is an assured fact of the near fu-
ture, and this will prevent indiscrimi-
nate use of railway appointments for
political purposes. Certainly the $50
lated, moderately paid, closely watched,
railway officials, whether Republic an or
Democrat, cannot do anything like the
harm that is now done by the closely
organized, lavishly paid railroad kings
WAC defy watching, control elections
and legislative issues, by shameless use
of the corporate funds. This could not
be done under government ownership
It would give death blow to the
''Reign Of the Corporation The peo-
pie would come to their own again. 1t
would stop much corruption in legisla-
ton. 1t would relieve trade and COM
nerco of 'the trust" and combines y
It would destroy all discrimination in
traffic.
There could be no incentive. The
postoffce treats all alike; so would
government railroads. 1t would stop
speculative railroad building. The gov
crnment would lay out and build new
roads where needed only. It would, to
great extent, destroy tyranny of
capital over labor and render railroad
II, foAO \ IL. L
cotton planter to exchange produce
with the corn planter on fair terms,
which would leave a fair profit for
both. At present the railroads impov-
erish them both. It would remove the
hatred of the people toward the roads
and harmonic all avocations, and
would remove the power the railroad
companies now use to destroy bust
ness, a section, or an individual. It
would save enormous sums now paid
in salaries. It would save most of the
10000 or more lives lost every year for
lack of safety appliances, such as
couplings, air brakes, guards, etc. 1t
would bring about cheap traffic be-
tween all sections of this great country,
destroy the pools, knock the pins
from under the stock brokers, put an
end to the insolence with which so
many railroads treat the public. 1t
would remove much of the leverage
which English capital has on our labor
and its produce; give a deathblow to
this internal ''booming" of towns and
cities at the expense of the country,
for the benefit of few capitalists. It
would be a giant strike in the direction
of equality and humanity against
special privileges. shoddy aristocracy,
based on commercial spoils, bribery,
and corruption.
REPUBLICAN FIELIBUsTERNG.
In q letter to THE REPUBLIc, Mr.
Baker of the Sixth Kansas district