The Topeka state journal., 1906-01-02
is NOT YET OVER.
Railroad Fight Has Hardly
Commenced in Congress.
Not Even Certain There viii Be
Favorable Legislation.
SEEN IN WASHINGTON.
Mr.. FaxOn, Senator Longs Secre~
tary, Gives His Impressions.
The Plans Under Consideration
Are Discussed.
SEEN IN WASHINGTON.

Washington. Jan. 2.-The mistaken
impression seems to exist in some parts
of Kansas that the fight for railroad
rate legislation is over, and that the
legislation and its character are a GER
tainty.
Those who think this way. whether
they be individuals or newspapers,
should disabuse their minds of such an
impression. Nothing could be further
from the real facts.
Not only is the fight for railroad rate
legislation not over, but it has not even
been begun. It is in its incipiency
There is no certainty that there will be
favorable legislation, though there is
excellent ground for believing there will
be Assuredly no man lives, either in
Washington or Kansas, who knows
what, in the event there shall be legis-
lation, the character of it shall be.
There are those in Kansas in
Washington, too-who who seek to per-
suade themselves that the fight is over
and legislation as good as enacted be
cause the light has daWned on them
that what seems to be a fair indication
of what the legislation may be is totally
different from what eager and insistent
railroad raters in Kansas wanted in the
beginning In a word, the solution of
this great problem has its limitations
and there We're many bright persons
who did not observe this fact in the
beginning. They placed themselves on
record as in favor of arbitrary and
harsh legislation. That this is impossi-
bic, now, in the light of recent events,
as instanced by q no less authority than
the president of the United States him
self
one. year ago, the president was popu-
10 Wv fa % fafhaTino fhP FlSCn-
Townsend bill, introduced in the house
of representatives, and which passed
that body in a most surprisingly brief
period. but which remained unacIed
upon by the senate. That bill sought
to fix an arbitrary rate; below which
the railroads could not go. 1t would
tend, sooner or later to a rigidtty of
rates, and to a universal change OF all
rates, under government SUPERVISION II
put the rate in effect at once, which
was manifestly unfair, and left no re-
course when time should prove, as 1t
doubtless would, that a rate in certain
localities even lower still was wise and
proper
That the president himself recOg-
nized the unfairness and futility of
such legislation as the Esch-Townsend
bill contemplated was shown in his
Raleigh speech on october 19, when,
for the first time, he made reference
to the interstate commerce cOmHlS-
sion or some administrative body
fixing "maximum' rate, and putting
it in effect practically at once This
was altogether different from the pro-
visions Of the Esch-TOwnsend bill.
Then came the message of the pres
ident. To congress on December 4 he
practically reiterated the statements
made in his speech at Raleigh. This
was not to the liking of those who
wished radical legislation. So, in or
der to let themselves down as easily
as possible, and not to call attention
to the fact that the president has
changed his ideas on the proposed
legislation, these papers and individu-
ais are insisting that the legislation is
fight is over.
There is no dfscredit to President
Roosevelt in the fact that he has
indeed changed his mind. The presi-
dent is a student. He has been study
ing this railroad rate question for
more than a year He knows more
and more about 1t all the time. And
yet he mOdestly disclaims himself any
expert knowledge, and arrogates to
himself no special qualifications as a
judge or master of the situation. But
it is to his credit that he has pro-
gressed in his studies of the question;
and takes advanced ground constantly
on it, which is more than some of
those can say who have been calling
on members Of congress to ''get right
with the president"
There are at least three proposed
methods of relief in railroad rate leg
islation: First, the Foraker plan, of
leaving the entire matter of regula-
ton to the courts. There is no advant-
age in this, as the courts now have
these prerogatives. Any shipper can
go to the federal courts on the ground
that a rebate is extortionate; and if
the road be ordered to put into effect
a lower rate. the road can go to the
courts if it believes the new rate to
be cOnfscatory. There is nothing in