St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-05-07
UNION PACIFIC.

Attorney General Olney responded TO
resolution of the house asking him in
effect to propose law for the settle
ment of the contention between the gov
ernment and the Union Pacific railway,
taking the ground upon lOng-existing
law ana precedent that the attorney
general is not permitted to give legal
advice at the call of either house. How.
ever. MIR. Olney. in communication to
congress, made an observation or two
pertinent to the condition, which should
be sufficiently advisory for the pur-
poses Of the legislators.
lie laid down the principle, which
ought to be universally agreed to, that
the government should not and can not,
through the courts, continue perma-
neatly in the business of operating a
railroad. Further, he assumes that,
unless within reasonable tina the
courts now in control of the Union Pa
ciiic are otherwise relieved of the prop
erty. the affairs of the company must.
be closed as in the ordinary manner.
and the proceeds Ut the assets applied
10 the payment of the debts. ~,
Mr.. Olney deprecates permanent con-
troll and operation Of that road or any
other, by the government, for the sufti-
cient reason that i. would be more
costly and less efficient than under pri-
vate management. He goes on to say
that he believes that sit is of Importance
10 the public generally. and of immense
moment to the people Of the states anu
territories traversed by the Union Pa
ciic railway. that the existing receiver
ship should give place to the manage
ment OF solvent and strong corpora
ton. and should give place to it as soon
as practicable" Holding to this opin.
ion he remarks that ''it is assumed that
congress will not seriously contemplate
the setting up of huge political ma
chine for what would inevitably prove
to he the mismanagement or Que of the
most important and valuable railroad
properties i'll the country"
No well-baianced business mind will
attempt to controvert suggestions SO
sound and practical. The question to
be solved is how best may they be car
ried into practical effect with the least
reasonable delay. 1t is essential that
the problem be worked out There is
no question but that advantage has been
taken OF the paternal kindness and
leniency of the government. Large OBJ
legations have arisen that it is exceed
lngly troublesome, from some points Of
view impossible, to eXtlnguish. Right
there is question to be settled before
the enterprise can be transferred to
private management.
The probabilities are that it will be
better for the government to forgive
the debt" at least not undertake to
drive hard bargain, SO that there may
be an inducement for good parties to
take the property and maintain it. 1t
will be vastly better to unload in that
way than to carry the burden and par
ticipate in operation.
Nor need this be considered extraya.
CANT and wasteful, but, on the other
hand. wise means of relief and pro-
motion. Fairly considered, such step
Cannot be censurable. The government
has done no more than it ought for the
of the country. If it quit
claims its interest In this enterprise,
letting bygones be bygones, the railway
Will be picked up by capital and oper-
ated better than the government can do
1t. either in sole control or as partner
ship, for the betterment of the whole
country and all the people who pay
fayaS