Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1906-09-06

ItllIuduS ny IL eONGIlitliCAt . iAtAl " 1
increase as rapidly throughout the coun-
try as the sentiment in favor of munici- |
pal ownership has increased in the cities.
Railroads Must Become Public Property.
1 have already reached the conclusion
that railroads partake so much of the
nature of a monopoly that they must ul-
timately became public property. n be
managed by public Officials in the inter-
est of the whole community in accord
ance with the wen-uefined theory that
public ownership is necessary where COM
petition is impossible. l do not. know
that the country is ready for this
of my W party favor 1t, but l believe
that an increasing number of members |
of all parties see in public ownership the |
sure remedy for determinations
persons and politics. and for the extor- |
ionate rates for the carrying of freight
and passengers. Believing, however, that |
federal government would result in a
Capitalization which would all but OBJ
literate state lines. / prefer to see only
the trunk lines operated by the federal
government. and the local lines by the
several state governments. Some have
opposed this dual ownership as imprac-
ticable. but investigation in Europe has
convinced me that it is entirely prac- ,
ticabie. Nearly all the railroads of Ger |
many are owned by the several states.
the empire not even owning the trunk
lines. and yet the interstate traffic is
in no wise o~bstructed. In travelling from
Constantinople to Vienna, one passes
through Turkey, Bulgaria, Servia, Hun
gary and a part of Austria without a
owns and operates it's own roads, AM
different languages are spoken on the
different divisions of the line. Sweden
and Norway each owns its railroads, but
they have no trouble about interstate
traffic, although their political relations
are somewhat strained. The ownership
and operations of the local lines by the
several state governments is not only
faogibla h,,t n clIita ftqnIf IN tha c0pdi-
tons existing in it's various states. In
those states where the people are ripe
for a change, the local lines can be pur-
chased. or new lines built, at once, while
private ownership can continue in those
states In which the people still prefer
private ownership. Some states have
been more careful han others to prevent
the watering of stock. and In the acquir-
ing of roads each state can act according
to the situation which it has to meet.
No Doubt of Government Power.
AS to the right of the governments. fed
eral and state. to W and operate rail-
roads there can be no doubt. If we can
deepen the water in the lakes, and buila
connecting canals in order to cheaper
year, we can build a railroad and cheap,
en- rates the whole year.; II we can spend
several hundred millions on the Panama
canal to lower transcontinental rates. we
can build a railroad from New York to
San Francisco to lower both transconti-
mental and local rates. The United
States mail is increasing so rapidly that
we shall soon be apie to pay the interest
on the cost of trunk lines out of the
money which we now pay to railroads. tor
question the propriety Of my mentioning
his n sqeISSst,t i ! 9sE not to fSf aVe se yUg ta toe
passage of the rate bill had he not ap.
pealed to the fear of the more radical
remedy Of government ownershlp, and
nothing viii SO RESTRAIN dhe railfq Fac
interstate m commission as the
same fear. The h~ighhanded manner In
which they have violated law, and ig-
nored authority, together. with the cor,
ruption discovered in high places, had
done more to create sentiment in favor OF
public ownership than all the speeches
and arguments of the opponents OF pri-
waite ownership. l have referred to the
railroad question as part of the trust
question because t,ley are so interviewer
that it is difficult to consider one without
the other.
Trusts a Political Development.
Just a word more in regard to the trusts.
Some defend them on the ground that
they are an economic development, and
that they cannot be prevented without
great injury to our industrial system.
This may be answered in two ways. First,
trusts are a political Development, rather
than an economic one; and. second, the
trust system cannot pc permitted TO con-
economic gain. 1t is political, because 1t
rests upon the corporation, and the cor
poration rests upon a statutory founda
ton. The trust, instead of being a natu-
raj development, is a form of legalized
larceny, and can exist only so long as
the law permits to exist. That there is
an economic advantage in production or
a large scale may be admitted; but be-
cause a million yards of cloth can be pro-
duced in one factory at a lower price pc
yard than one hundred thousand yards
can be produced in the same factory, il
5aae, ,,nf fol1opp that cloth would he nrO.
duced at a still W price per yard /
all the cloth consumed in the United
States were produced in one factory OF
under one management. There is a poini
Y beyond which the economic advantage o.
D large production ceases. The moment al
e industry approaches the position of a mo
a nopoly it begins to lose IN ECONOMIC ell
t cheney, for a monopoly discourages inven'
S ton, invites deterioration in quality, ant
{ destroys a most potent factor in produc'
e ton, viz, individual ambition. But thu
e political objections to a trust overcome
e any economic advantage which it can pos
e sibly have. No economic advantage cal
justify an industrial despotism, or com
pensate a nation for the loss of independ
: ence among its producers. Political lib
S erty could not long endure under an in
dustrial system which permitted a fey
e powerful magnates to control the mean
of livelihood of the rest of the people
innocent institution in comparison wit
e the trust. when the trust is carried to 1t
logical conclusion. The man who argue
that there Is an economic advantage !
private monopoly is aiding socialism.
Socialism and Democracy.
A socialist, asserting the economic su
periority of the monopoly, insists that It
e benefits shall accrue to the whole people
e and his conclusion cannot be denied If tn
it superiority of monopoly is admitted. Tn
If democratic party, If I understand its pos
ID political advantage of the private monor
n oily, and promises to oppose 1t wherever
ir manifests itself. 1t offers, as an alterns
tive. competition where competition
to circumstances are such as to prevel
ar competition. Socialism presents a consist
Of ent theory, but a theory which, in m
ID judgment, does not take human natul
tacks upon evils, the existence of whie
IN is confessed. It's weakness is that
e, would substitute a new disease-if not
nd worse one-for the disease from which v
suffer. The socialist is honest in the b.
lie lief that he has found a remedy for h.,
us man ills, and he must answered wi
ly argument, not with abuse The best We
"a to oppose socialism is to remedy. u
cy abuses which have grown up under ind
vidualism, but which are not a necessa
n part of individlalism, and the sooner tt
s leaving home l set forth my reasons {
lis opposing the socialist doctrine that Il
government should own and operate
,al the means Of production and transport
III LlOn, my ODSeTNhllOUS uuIluB tue pa
an year have strengthened my convictions
or that subject. Because ! am anxious
to preserve individualism. I am earnest
.or my desire to see the trusts exterminate
he root and branch, that the door of oppo
la tunity may be open to every Americ
ne citizen.
to Federal Expenditures
On another occasion | shall call attic
ton to the rapidly growing expenditu1
Tiff of the federal government. 1t Is natal
on. that those who look upon the taxation
,ad a blessing should view overgrown apr
lot priations with complacency, yet even I
ose desire to find ways of spending the rey
out nues brought into the treasury by a hi
to tariff cannot wholly account for the rec
he less extravaganza of recent congresses.
the Democracy Offers a Solution.
is Rut of This time | desire to cen