The Washington times., 1916-06-20

Congress, the Interstate Commerce
Commission, the Federal courts. have
of necessity delved deep into the
problems of divided public authority.
They all realize its impossibility. Busi-
ness generally does; financial interests
do. There are some political factors
that refuse to understand II; and chief
OF these are the state rights element in
the South and the political orsaniza-
lions of States that want to retain the
power and patronage OF the state rail-
way commissions.
At the time OF It's adoption in Chi
cago, this plank attracted little alton
ton, considering its revolutionary
character. Yet II declares in favor OF
the concentration OF all authority OF
governmental regulation over the rail-
roads in the Federal Government. II
would abolish every State railway COM
mission, and every vestige OF the au-
thority of other public service commits
sions over carriers doing Interstate
business. It declares that this shall be
necessary by amendment or the Con-
stitution.
Given Little Attention.
While the controversy over woman
suffrage received. in both conventions.
the most extravagant attention. and
while the victory of the sufrragists has
been credited with far more import
ance than IL really deserves. this far
reaching proposal In dealing with the
railroads has yet to make its impress
on the press and public. No doubt is
entertained in Washington. however,
that It will presently do this.
The Republican declaration looks to
settling. In a large way. the whole
current problem that railroad regula-
tion involves; to restoring the credit
OF carriers. to making II possible for
extensions of facilities that they so
greatly need.
Between the Republican and Demo
cratic platform as a whole. the issue Is
largely one of definitions. The Demo-
Gratis have well nigh mounted the Re-
publican platform on tariff; they have
declared for a tariff commission: the
difference between the two pronounce.
ments on suffrage requires careful
consideration to make II very obvious.
Makes Square Issue.
But on this question Of railroad con-
troll a square issue was made; for
after the Republicans had written
their proposal, the Democratic con-
vention considered II, and there was
instantly developed a determined pur-
pose to fight 1t. No doubt need be
entertained on this point.
There was effort to get into the St
Louis platform a denunciation OF the
Chicago plan: and while this effort
| failed, and the Democratic declaration
is as silent as the grave on the sub
J ject, yet n sentiment OF antagonisn
was developed which makes certain
that no favorable consideration fol
such a scheme can be had during the
next Administration II that Admins.
! tration shall be Democratic. State
| rights traditions are yet too firmly
imbedded nthe Democratic creed.
Three States which have been es-
pecially prominent in the development
of their own codes of radical intrastate
regulatory measures are expected to be
Headers in the opposition to Federaliza-
ton. They are Texas. Oklahoma. and
| Wisconsin.
The oklahoma and Texas people were
particularly active at st. Louis in de-
| manding that the Republican centrali-
cation plank re "scotched" by a re-
joinder in the Democratic declaration.
Insistence Was Strong.
It Is reported that the insistence wal
SO strong that the question was carried
I'D to the Presidents personal represen
tatives, IL not finally submitted to the
| President himself. In the end the de
| termination was to ignore the question
II Is understood that this decision wal
based on the view that the South could
not be made any more Democratic
than II Is by q declaration for State
rights. while the North. where tho
Democrats must carry many doubtful
States in order to win. leans decidedly
toward the Republican view.
| The Democratic answer to this Fed
eralization program will be made from
=
- -