The record-union., 1896-01-21

by a State convention, called by the
Mayor of San Francisco. that they are
simply serving the private purposes of
the railroad by advocating Government
ownership. They are also informed by
Mr. Sutro and his convention, in no un-
certain terms, of the fact of which they
might have been advised through the
columns of the Record Union" to wit.
that there is no party in the United
States outside of California in favor Of
the Government owning the railroads.
Moreover, what are they to do now?
They are informed that their PROPOSE
tion is impossible, impracticable and
has no supporters. They are told that
so long as they favor Government own
ership, they have no voice in the set
tlement of the question. They are also
denounced by implication as railroad
hirelings and tools. They are convicted
by the logic of Mr.. Sutros utterances
and the convention as being feeble
minded, because Sutro's declaration
that their advocacy of Government
ownership is in the interest of the raia-
road. is a charge by the strongest pos
sible implication that they had not
sense enough to understand the nature
of the issue nor judgment to so comport
themselves as to have an influence upon
its determination.
We shall not hereafter use the words
feeble-minded. foolish and idiotic. as
applicable to those who favor Govern
ment ownership. Our sympathy for the
very awkward position in which they
are placed by the application of these
terms-by implication, at least-by a
State anti-raiIroad convention will
make it unnecessary for US to awaken
their conscience by language of suffi-
cient strength to attract their atten-
ton.
Our esteemed contemporary, the
"Bee,' viii please note that it is not in
line with the anti-railroad sentiment of
California in advocating Government
ownership, and our esteemed contem-
porary. the Chronicle" also will find
itself out in the cold. An anti-railroad
convention has informed both our lead
| ing contemporaries that the way to beat
measure is simply to be opposed to
it; to inform our representatives in
Congress of what we do not want, and
leave them at liberty to guess what we
do want In fact, we are highly pleased
with the present situation of affairs.
We find an anti-railroad, anti-funding
bill convention declaring that every
thing we have said concerning the
proposition of Government ownership
is not only true, but it is eminently an
ti-raiIroad. We find a convention
branding with contumely and scorn all
Of our esteemed contemporaries who
have advocated Government ownership
as being in the interest of the railroad,
and as desiring by that advocacy, COW
ertIy and deceitfully, to promote the
passage of the funding bill.
Mr.. Sutro and his convention don't
want the Government to own the rail-
road. They want some other system
than the Southern Pacific to own it.
They want it owned and operated by
some Eastern system in the interest of
the East. They want it's ownership
to have other alliances and other sym
pathies than those which relate to the
industrial and commercial development
of the Pacific Coast They want to i'm
pale San Francisco on a long line Of
transportation owned and controlled by
New York, Chicago or Philadelphia.
The proposition for the Government to
own the road is even out of order in an
anti-railroad convention.
We have never for a moment i'm
peached the sincerity of our contem-
oraries when they have advocated Gov
ernment ownership. We have and do
impeach their judgment. and to the
support Of this impeachment Of their
wisdom and discretion we find that Mr..
Sutro and his anti-railroad convention
have come to our assistance nobly. We
shall watch with keen interest the effect
of this rebuke of Mr.. Sutro and his fol-
lowers, and in the meantime we shall
in the mildest terms express the sin
cere sympathy we feel for those who
wander so far from the Sutro fold.