El Paso daily herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1881-1901, 1898-09-06

Says the Railway and Engineering
Review: Referring to the comment
made in the Railway and Engineering
Review of August 18th, in connection
with the hearing before the interstate
commerce commission of the Canadian
Pacific differentisl case, the Chicago
Journal INDUCES in some remarks
which, although evidently intended to
be fair, nevertheless show lack of
comprehension, not only of the ques-
ton at issue, but of the railroad Situa
tion in general. According to that
paper, at is question of whether it is
expedient and just for the government
to interfere with the people of a large
district, cut them off from the benefits
of competition from which they have
profted. and give the railway trust
power to levy tribute on them in order
to pay dividends which it cannot earn,
or says it cannot earn, in the field of
fair business enterprise"
There is world of assumption in
this statement that unfortunately is
not borne out by the facts in the case.
There is no question of interference"
with the people of any district, nor is
there any railway trust to whom the
power of levying tribute can be given.
Engineering Review was that, being
unable to protect themselves even
against themselves, the railways must
have the protection of the government
| if they were successfully tn resist, not
the competition, but the encrOachments
of foreign lines against which, under
| the disabilities imposed oy govern
| ment, they found themselves powerless.
| If there were railway trust there
would be no need for such protection,
but inasmuch as under the present
| laws not only are such trusts, but all
| agreements for the maintenance of
rates among competitive lines, illegal
it is necessary that some effective check
| to illegitimate competition shall be
established. 1t is not believed that
| the Journal will claim that it is either
| just or polite for the government to
tie the hands of the American roads,
thereby removing the power of self
defense, without at the same time pro-
tecting them from the attacks of outsid-
| erS which it cannot similarly control.
Another point in the Journals COM
ment seems worthy OF attention. 1t
says 1.-THE plant of the American
companies is that they are not max
ing money, but it does not follow that
the government ought to help them to
make money; that is not what the
tum of the Journal appeared it bad
been believed that the office of gov.
ernment was to protect the interests
of all of its citizens. In the case OF
coastwise traffic, it helps vessels to
make money by prohibiting foreign
competition. The entire merchant
marine of the United States on the
ocean, on the Great Lakes and or
our rivers, are all helped by govern
ment to make money. Signal station:
are established to warn them agains
storms; buoys and lighthouses are pro
vided to permit of safe navigation
channels are dredged in order thai
heavier cargoes may be carried
and in numerous other WAY:
vessels are helped to make money for
their owners. Not only so, but this
aid which affords a means of competi
tion whereby the revenues of the raj
ways are reduced, is in large measure
furnished by the railroad taxes. A
the same time, these vessels for which
so much is done in the way of aid, arr
permitted to charge what they pleas,
Tor their service, take or refuse cargo
at will, and are altogether free from
restriction except as to few mino
regulations, while the railroads VIII
receive nothing are subject to contro
in the matter OF charges, obliged t,
receive and transport freight and pas
sengers regardless of preference, ant
are altogether subject to regulation:
which, In some cases, are burdensome
in the extreme.
1t is not claimed that this regulation
should not exist, but it is asserted thai
if the restrictions imposed by govern
ment are of such character as to pre-
vent self-protection, it is the duty O
government to provide it. AS pre-
viously stated, there is no more reason
why American vessels should be pro
tected from foreign competition in Am
erican trade than that American rail
ways should be protected from simila
competition by foreign railways. Nei
ther is it believed that, as a matter O
Justice. government has an,
more right to aid i
the construction of waterways tina