The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1896-07-31
MR.. BRYAN ON RAILROADS



Most of our local contemporaries are
undergoing a novel experience. The
Chicago convention surprised them by
furnishing matter for controversy not
only upon the money question, with
which the majority of them. without
having studied it very profoundly, are
sufficiently familiar to be able to patter
some presentable phrases, but upon a
number of other economic and social
topics about which they know abso-
lutely nothing at all. 1t is rather en-
pertaining in such circumstances to see
these bewildered organs accusing spe-
cial students of these matters Of Jig
norance,'' as they are doing now. Our
ancient Federalist contemporary, the
Commercial Advertiser, for instance.
quotes these appalling statements from
an old speech Of Mr.. Bryans:
There is no more dangerous monop-
oily than railroad company. am one
of those who believe that there may be
in those great enterprises which are
virtually natural monopolies a better
principle for the public than cOmpett-
ton, namely, legislative regulation.
There is economy in monopoly, but that
economy must be used for the benefit
of all the people and not for the bene-
fit of those only who have charge of the
monopoly.
Upon this citation the Commercial
Advertiser comments:
In other words, this juvenile orator is
an advocate of state socialism in it's
most complete form. His assertion that
a railroad company-an organization
formed and maintained for the useful
and laudable purpose of transporting
Gus monopoly" from its very nature,
is a revelation of ignorance which
brands this man as unfit, not alone for
the presidency, but for the duties of the
humblest legislator.
Now it happens that the axiom that
railroads are natural monopolies is one
of the commonplaces of political econ
omy. That the ordinary principles of
competition do not work in this field,
and that some form of government
regulation is a necessity, is recognized
by such conservative authorities as
Charles Francis Adams, formerly pres
ident of the Union Pacific. Most coun-
tries carry this regulation to the ex-
tent of having at least part of their
railroads operated directly by public
officials. None, so far as we are aware,
leave them entirely uncontrolled. They
have more liberty in the United States
than in any other important country
in the world.
The reasoning of the experts on this
matter is simple and conclusive. If
the towns A and z be connected by a
single railroad which is abundantly
able to handle all the business offered,
the construction of another line to
share the same business will be, from
an economic point of view, a pure
waste of the resources of the commu-
nifty. 1t Will be employing two dollars
for plant and running expenses to do
the work that could just as well be
done by one. And it will not even Sc
cure competition, for the two lines,
after a preliminary trial of strength,
will inevitably combine on a basis of
securing and dividing "an the traffic
will bear 1t is much better to recog-
nize the essentially monopolistic char
acter of the service at the start, and
allow the original line to do all the
work under such public regulation as
Will protect its patrons from extortion-
In the July number of the Annals of
the American Academy of Political and
Social Science, which has just come to
hand. the public nature of the work of
transportation is emphatically asserted
by Interstate Commerce Commissioner
Martin A. Knapp. 1T follows. there
FORE observes Mr.. Knapp, from the
fundamental Office of transportation,
that to provide the highways of travel
and the agencies of inland exchange
is a function of government not merely
legitimate, but primary and inherent.
To regard these agencies as private
property. subject to the rules which
govern the management of other pos
sessions, is a mistaken and misleading
conception. Upon this point there is
much confusion of thought and a sur
prising want of correct understand
ing
Especially. we might add, in some
local newspaper offices.