The Sauk Centre herald. (Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minn.) 1886-current, 1904-02-25
ThF MERCER.

full in the last issue of the H erald
has again called the attention of the
public and the press to the merger
question. From the discussion of
the merger throughout the state
there seems about as many ideas on
the subject as to what the merger
is, what was intended to be accom-
plished by it's formation and the
effect it would have on the business
interests of the state, as there are
papers in the state. Much technic-
al explanation has been offered by
both the friends and opponents of
the measure, but when one grows
technical on question of this kind
he grows ,obtuse. Words are as
often used to hide meaning as they
are to make meaning clear.
The merger was an attempt on
the part of James J. Hill and other
leading railway owners and mag
mates of the United States, to com
bine the Great Northern, the North
ern Pacific and the Burlington
systems of railway under single
management. The Northern Secu-
rites Company, of which Mr.. Hill
is President, accepting the stock of
the owners of these different lines
and issuing its ewa in lieu thereof.
In the construction, maintenance
and operation of railroads there are
three interested parties.
The owners,
The patrons of the roads,
The employees of the roads.
As neither the patrons or en-
ployes made any effort to secure
this combination and it was a move
conceived and projected wholly by
the owners, it is plain that it was
movement on the part of the owners
to increase their profits. The idea
that the owners of these roads
would seek their combination unless
it would, or they believed it would,
increase their profits is too absurd
for consideration.
AS they could not expect to ma
terially increase their rates for
freight or transportation of passen-
gers, the public would not stand for
that, the question arises how this
increased profit is to be derived.
The only way this can be done is
by the elimination of competition
and the expenses of competition.
Any shipper or. passenger who
has lived in a town where there was
only single railway line and after
wards rival line entered the town
knows that after the arrival of the
second line he received better &C.
commodations, better facilities,
more courteous treatment and that
he was better off with two compel
ing lines than he was when there
was no competition. There is not
a patron of railroad in the land
but knows that the elimination of
competition between railway COM
panies is detrimental to his inter
ests.
1t takes men to carry on compe-
tition and whenever there is a mer-
ger of competing business concerns
it means that some men will be
thrown out of employment; that
some men will lose their jobs.
This is strikingly illustrated by the
formation of the "International-
Harvester Trust" The farmer
next year will pay as much as ever
for his binder, he will pay more for
his extras and Irvine, there will be
no leniency shown in deferred pay.
ments and there will be ten thous-
and less men working for machine
companies than there were a year
ago. The proposition that a mer.
ger of competing railway lines, OF
competing business concerns of any
kind will be detrimental to the in.
terests of both the patrons of the
institutions and to the working men
of the country is SO manifestly plain
that anyone who disputes it should
go and buy his intellect pair OF
crutches.
That this -nuastiop bas haan &c