The evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1907-1908, 1907-08-20

individuals convicted could have been
sent to the Fpenitentiary, under the
Elkins act the punishment by i'm
prisonment was taken away, though
the fine was increased. The speaker
continued:
1t is we'll understood that the Elkins bill
was passed without opposition by, and with
the full consent of, the railroads, and that
the chief reason for this was the elimina-
ton of the penitentiary penalty for unjust
determinations. The abolition OF imprlson-
ment, as a possible penalty, was unfortu-
nate.
Experience has shown that n mere
fine is generally not enough to deter
a corporation from violation of the
law because 1t then becomes "a matter
of mere business speculation. The inn
~prisonment of two or three prominent
officers of a railway OF "A
trust, engaged in giving or receiving
secret rebates. would have a grenter
deterrent effect for the future than
millions In "A fine.
In the rate bill, Congress amended the
Elkins blu and restored Imprisonment as
part of the punishment for secret rebates.
Had the Relating and dishonest practices
of the railroad companies and the trusts,
been as clearly known to Congress- and TIE
cred, as they We're when the rate bill was
passed, the Elkins bill would not have
passed so smoothly.
under the Elkins law, but as amended by
kthe new rate bill. This Is because the Ell
kins law, as amended, contains the part OF
the interstate legislation which
prescribes the punishment for violations OF
the law and so, In ordinary practise, comes
into operation after the violations have
been discovered under the other provisions
Of the rate bill.
The Rate Law has not been in opera
ton a year, and the beneficial results
from its operations, though clear, are not
ready to be presented in statistical array.
The passage of the bill was taken, the
country over, and properly, taken. as a
most important stem toward the suppress
sion Of abuses which had grown up in a
period Of tolerant prosperity. IT. was
become poisoned by dishonesty, injustice
and fraud. Passed at the Instance of Mr..
Roosevelt, 1t stands as a monument to the
principle which he has necessarily MAIN
tained In speech and action. that the laws
must be so made that they can be en-
forced as well against the sins of the
wealthy and the powerful as against those
Mr.. Bryan contends that the law was
greatly weakened In authorizing, or recog-
nizing judicial Intervention to restrain the
orders of the commission. The criticism
has not the slightest foundation. There
can be no judicial appeal in the nature
of q complete review on the merits from
the commission 10 the supreme 0ONIl VI
to the Circuit Court of the United States,
for the commission is not a court of first
instance, but only a mere administrative
tribunal.
I am opposed to Government owner
ship
First. because existing Government
railways are not with either
the efficiency or economy of privately
managed roads and the rates charged
are not as low and therefore not ms
beneficial to the public,
Second, because 1t would involve an
expenditure of certainly twelve billions
of dollars to acquire the interstate
railways and the creation of an en-
OrmOus national debt.
Third, because 1t would place in the
hands of a reckless executive a power
that the imagination can hardly con-
ceive, and wonId expose our popular
institutions to danger.
The supervision. proposed need not ma
terially reduce the legitimate operation
of individualism in railway enterprise. 1t
will indeed limit the opportunity TO ac-
cumulate enormous fortunes through over
capitalization or secret rebates, blu the
legitimate profit which comes from CLOSE
attention to operation, to efficiency of
service, and economy in details and from
broad conceptions Of new methods of re-
ducing cost without impairing the service
will not be disturbed in the slightest.
There is no attempt to take away the
property Of the railway companies; there
Is no furnishing of public money to the
enterprise and no public officers are re-
quired to administer the property. There
IS no more attempt In this law to make
transportation a government business than
there is in the national banking act to
making banking a government business.
The Secretary went at some length into
the subject of Interstate railroads. liability
for the killing and i~njuring Of their en-
discussing the latest Congressional
provisions, which he thought would lead to
the settling of practically all such claims
recourse to litigation. This
brought the speaker to the topic Of trusts.
He said:
The combination of capital in large
to manufacture goods with the
economy Is just ms necessary
as the assembling of the parts of u
to the economical and more
manufacture of what In old times
made by hand. The Government
should not interfere with the one any
more than the other. In he proper
operation of competition the public
Will soon share with the manufacturers
the advantage In lowered prices. When,
such combinations not only
lower the cost to themselves. but are
able to control the market and main
or raise the old prices, the public
derives nc benefit aud Il helpless in
the hands Of a monopoly.
Fear of the existence Of such an abuse
led to the passage Of the antitrust law. in
1880. 1t recognizes two forms in which this
evil may be maintained. One Is by an
among a number OF different
manufacturers of an article for the mainte- |
nan0a NJ tho nFfna nf tha a4ffala aud f1al