The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1896-08-26

IMPORTANT QUESTION
The Government Ownership of
- Railroads.
SHALL THE UNITED STATES
ATTEMPT 1T.
Philadelphia American,

Philadelphia American.
Since the adjournment Of the Popu-
list Convention, and the adoption by
that convention of plank favoring
the government ownership of rail-
roads, there has appe ared in the mon
Opolistic press much unreasonable
comment on this score. We have seen
those who believe that the govern
ment should own and operate our rail-
road systems in the interest of the
whole people, called demagogues and
robbers. We have even seen those
who advocate this socialistic step, be-
lieving that in no other way can un-
just discrimination between persons
and places in the matter Of transpor-
tation rates be prevented, held up to
scorn as anarchists.
Those who SO loudly, but withal so
ignorantly, deprecate the government
ownership Of railroads, would do we'll
to fix their attention for few min
utes On the report of the Committee
on Government Ownership, Control
and Regulation Of Railways, made to
the National Convention OF Railroad
Commissioners, held at the Office Of
the Interstate Commerce Commission
at Washington on May 10th and 10th
last. On this committee, which was
appointed by authority of the conven-
tion held the year previously, served,
Hen. A. K. Teisberg, of Minnesota,
Isaac B. Brown, OF Pennsylvania, S.
O. Wilson, of North Carolina. J. G.
Allen, Of N Nebraska and Olin Merrill,
of Vermont. Two reports were sub
mitted to the convention, minority
report by Mr.. Wilson of North Caro-
lima taking decided ground in favor of
government ownership,a and the report
OF the majority, which was somewhat
tentative and apologetfc. the members
lof the aierity recognizing the evils
of over-capitaIizatiOn and arbitrary
Determinations In the matter Of
rates, recognizing government owner
ship not only as feasible, but perhaps
the only possible remedy, and yet hesi-
tating to advocate such ownership.
But the fact that the majority Of
the committee were evidently preju-
diced against government ownership D
gives their report even more weight
than 1t would otherwise carry.
Listen, in part, what they had to say:
'"That the government has the
right to acquire the railroads of this
country by purchase, at fair valua-
tion, no one will dispute.
ut is only question of expediency
and policy. In Republican form OF
government such as ours, it is not
expedient nor good policy to invade or
appropriate fields Of industry for the
simple gain there might be in it.
"Our government has assumed con-
troll over the waterways Of the cOun-
try for the benefit Of all the people;
large sums of public money are annu-
ally expended to maint tain the use full
ness OF such waterways. in the inter-
est of commerce, but the government
does not build vessels to enter into
competition with Its citizens in the
carrying trade. IL railroads could be
used in the same manner as are the
waterways, there could be no question,
perhaps, that the government would
have exercised the same control over
them as it has over waterways; but
from the nature of railroad business
this is not practicable. Hence, II the
government should assume the owner
ship OF the railroads, 1T would neces-
sarily also have to own and operate
the equipment; In other words, do the
whole railroad business.
"While it may be true that some Of
our people desire government owner
ship of railroads for the money they
believe there Is in it doubtless other
and better reasons that influence the
majority who are in favor OF this
scheme.
zone of these better reasons is aptly
expressed In the last annual report Of
one of the members Of this committee
Mr.. Brown of Pennsylvania-as fol-
lows:-Our people have little to com.
plain of from the common carriers, ,ex-
cept on the question of discrimina-
tions on this subject, IL they would
be true to the interests OF those they
serve. Government ownership of rail-
roads is most questionable scheme.
in a republic at least, and yet II dis
ordinations are to cOntinde, II IA
vOritism of such character as to en-
rich some and ruin others is to be
practiced. the transition period of
railways TO government control is not
SO remote as some imagine
"In the opinion Of this committee,
the sentiment in favor Of government
ownership OF railroads is due, not only
to the practices Of determinations be-
tween persons and places, but also to
the DISQUALIFICATION Of railroads.
and the delay under our present sys-
tenn of adjudicating controversies be-
tween the railroads AMI their pat
rOnS.
Among the objections to goverl-
ment ownership OF railroads are the
cost of them to the government, and
the consequent increase of the public
debt, and also that 1t would create a
vast field of political patronage, and
consequent corruption.
LAS to the first objection, the cost
of the railroads, we believe this gov
ernment is amply able to assume that
burden. This government could bor-
row money cheaper than private indi-
viduals or corporations; but very lit.
tie money would. perhaps, be needed;
the pres ent owners would doubtless be
gland to exchange their stocks and
bonds for those Of the United States,
whereby they would be assured of q
fixed income. We fail to see in what
respect the public would be saddled
with any additional burden; the peo-