Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1900-1911, 1907-07-25
AS to Government Ownership

Government ownership is not an i'm
mediate issue. large majority of the
people stifl hope for effective regulation,
and while they so hope they will not con-
slider ownership. While many Democrats
believe-and Mr.. Bryan is one OF the
number-that public ownership OFFERS the
ultimate solution of the problem, stlli.
those who believe that the public VIII
finally. in self-defense, be driven to own
ership recognize that regulation must be
tried under the most favorable circum-
stances before the masses will be ready
to try a more radical remedy.
Regulation cannot be sufficiently tried
within the next year, and there is no de-
sire anywhere to make government own
ership an issue in 1908. Mr.. Bryan tuily
agrees with those who believe that 1t
would be unwise to turn attehtioli lio On
regulation, on which the people are ready
70 act. TO government ownership, upon
which the people are not ready TO act
To inject the government ownership ques-
ton into the next campaign would simply
give representatives of the railroads a
Chance to dodge the issue of regulation
and deceive the public.
Not a Success, He Says
$50. far the railroads have been success
f,,I In preventing effective federal regu-
1ation. and state regulation mas, as d
rule. been restrained by the united
states courts 1t is about twenty years
since the interstate commerce commls,
sion committee was created. IL required
about ten years for the courts 10 li nn
ont the powers conferred were insufff-
cient and then it took about ten years
To secure an amendment. The railroads
fought the amendment at every step, ana
the president was finally forced TO COM
promise with the railroad Republicans in !
the senate in order to secure their sup
mort. Even that amendment, secured
after tremendous effort, falls snort Oh |
what 1t should be. 1t aims to stop re-
hates and passes-and the railroads profit |
by both the stoppage of re- |
hates and the prohibition of passes-but |
extortionate rates still exist, and state |
legislation for the reduction of rates has |
in an agitation which will de- |
prive the state of authority and cen
tralize all regulation in congress.
1.-THE Democratic party must meet the
issue presented; it must resist the en-
croachments upon the authority of the
states 1t must insist upon the exercise
of federal power for the regulation OF
interstate commerce, and it must insist
upon the exercise of state authority for
the exercise of all of the power vested in
the state This question has grown in
Importance during the past year and its
prominence will be increased if any at
tempt is made to impair state authority
The Republican party is as impotent to
regulate the railroads as 1t is to eXtermi-
nate the trusts and to reform the tariff.
Praise for the President
1.-THE Democratic party has in three ma
tional compaigns demanded effective rail-
road regulation, while the Republican
national platforms have been silent upon
the subject. The president has partially
adopted the Democratic view on this sub
ject, but so far the Republican leaders
have resolutely opposed it. The president
is helping to educate the people to the
need of railroad regulation, but his party,
under it's present leadership, is powerless
to accomplish this or any other import
ant reform.
IF the Democratic party will clearly
and unequivocally demand, first, the as
pertaining of the value of all the rail-
roads; second, the preventing of over
capitalization; and third, the reduction
of rates to a point where they will yield
only a reasonable return upon the real
value of the roads, if the party will do
this, it will commend itself not only to
Democrats, but to those Republicans who
have been led to study the railroad ques-
ton. The railroad situation presents a
vital issue, and the issue should be so
| stated that everyone can understand the
party's position. While Democrats may
differ as to the relative Importance of the
trust question, the tariff question and the
railroad question, all must agree that the
party must take the side of the common
| people on all three questions.
Let the line be drawn between those
| who want to make this a government of
\ the people, by the people, and for the
| people, and those who want it to be a
| government of the corporations, by the
corporations, and for the corporations