The Bottineau courant. (Bottineau, Bottineau County, N.D.) 1895-1929, 1918-04-04

problem nave heafQ our learned con-
servative brethren tell of private in
the maximum amount to the railroad
companies and be utterly silent as to
railroad management and government
tai policy.
/ object to the 18 months period as
substantially establishing at this time
policy Of the return of the roads
and as substantially precluding the
policy Of Government ownership after
the war. While it may be asserted
that by repeal, additional enactment,
and the like, we may enter upon new
policies after the war, nevertheless
this bill does, in effect, tie our hands,
establishing not alone our present in
tention, but for future policy, and
this is neither wise nor statesman
like. Were I not an advocate Of gov
ernment ownership, I should protest
against this provision Of the bill. Ny
advocacy of the specific policy but in
tensifies that protest.
The views which entertain and ex-
press today upon Government owner
ship are not the product of a day nor
the result Of recent events. Years
and years of dealing with the problem
of railroad transportation in it's var
ious phases finally convinced me that
the only way in which the intertwin-
ing difficulties Of the railroad situa-
tion could be solved was by the Gov
ernment itself. The American people
for many, many years have been deal
ing with the intricate and important
question of railroad transportation
and railroad management with rath-
er Indifferent success, and, just as
great crises have ever decided the
most momentous world problems, so
our war, with our railroads, has fin
ally pointed the way. The original
idea entertained by those who were
managers or builders of railroads was
expressed by celebrated railroad
financier of the East in 'The public
be damned" and by quite a famous
traffic manager in the West, that "We
charge all the traffic will bear" The
railroad was regarded as the private
property Of him who invested in it,
without duty or obligation to others
than the owner. The public's rela-
tion was considered as wholly Sec
ondary and Of principal Importance
in ministering to the prosperity and
the emoluments of the road. Gradu-
ally it dawned upon our people that
the railroad after all constituted a
public highway; that it ran through
city and town and country by virtue
of the permission of the people them
selves, that it became so intertwined
with every human activity and every
business and industry that it was a
publ;c necessity; and then i few be-
gan to see the light and to insist that
a public highway maintained by the
sufferance of the public and travers-
ing the public domain by virtue Of the
public's permission was, in it's essence,
first public use. The cynical view
point Of the early founders of the
great railway systems was quickly
eliminated by a rapidly awakening
people, and the early suggestions that
the first duty of a public carrier was
to the public resulted in numerous
legislative enactments and in the cry
stallization of a public sentiment
which required the railroad to be the
servant rather than the master of the
public. The old idea that the rail-
road was designed solely for the pur-
pose of paying dividends to the own
ers gave way to the new-that the
paramount obligation Of the road was
to the public, and that the owners
were entitled from the operation of
the railroad only a reasonable return
upon their investment.
The problem has been, first, an econ
omic problem, problem of economic
liberty, and out of this has grown all
the other perplexing questions. By a
system of regulation which has grown
up of late years some Of these pro-
blems have been solved, but by no
means all. Regulation, sometimes
drastic, sometimes lax, has been un-
dertaken by the various States. Reg
ulation by the Interstate Commerce
Commission has been undertaken on
behalf of the Nation. I have heard
it stated again and again upon this
floor that railroad regulation has been
a failure. / do not by any means con-
cede that fact. In the jurisdiction
from which come it has been al
marked success, winning alike the
praise Of the people and the roads
themselves; but the consensus Of
opinion, apparently, here is that from
the larger sense we have failed in our
railroad regulation failed either in
recognizing the fundamental economic
question from the standpoint of the
public or the fundamental financial
question from the standpoint Of the
railroad. It it be true that railroad
regulation has failed in the United
States, then, Of course, there is but
one alternate, and that is Government
ownership. If it be true, as has BEEN
insisted upon this floor in the last
week again and again, that regula-
tion has been unjust to railroads and