The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1924-10-27
DENOUNCES LaFOLLETTE FOR
RAILROAD NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
(The Railway Age)

l I1dI
| misrepresentation of railway mat
ters made i'm his address ut Omaha
| on October 20. The Railway Age
says that if Senator LaFollette act
ually believes the things he said re-
garding railway matters at Omaha
she is so ignorant that he has no
moral right to try to discuss railway
matters. If he does know the facts
he told what he knew to be false"
Senator LaFolIette said in his
Omaha address that the advance IN
rates in 1920 was $l,50O,O0O,0O0 and
that "the railroads have spent mil
lions of dollars in propaganda to con-
vince the American people that this
huge increase in freight charges was
due to wage increases paid to rail
way employees" He added: ut is
true that the Railroad Labor Board
did award the employees "A wage in
crease just before this rate increase
was put into effect. but the wage in
crease amounted to $5G4 100000. The
rate increase was 81 100000, 900, or
nearly 81 100000 greater than
the wages"
Commenting upon this statement,
the Railway Age says: This is the
kind of Justification by the under
statement or suppression of pertinent
facts which constantly characterizes
what Senator LaFollette says. What
are the facts? The railways were re-
turned to private operation on March
DE- lnt, 70
vate operation they were mourning
| large deficit which was constantly in
| creasing In February, 1920, they
failed by II million dollars to earn
enough to pay their operating ex-
penses and taxes and incurred de-
| ficit, after the payment of the gov
ernment's guarantees to the owners
of the railways, which amounted to
Is million dollars. In other words, at
| the conclusion of government opera
tion the deficit being incurred was
running at the rate of at least 900
million dollars a year. That was a
| small circumstance that had to be
| considered in fixing rates after the
railroads were returned to private
| operation.
"Furthermore, the advance in
wages granted was much larger than
stated by Senator LaFollette. 1t act.
ually amounted on the average to 81
cents day for every day in the year
for every employee on the payroll.
The number of employees in 1920
averaged 2,022,932. Therefore, the
| 4. Al
rate Of $67l $4,000 a year.
"The advance in rates granted was
necessary, first, to offset the deficit
that was being incurred under gov
eminent operation and, secondly, to
offset this advance in wages. Senator
LaFollette's statement was intended
to convey the false impression that
it was needed only to cover the ad-
vance in wages made in 1920. If the
advance in rates had been only as
great as this advance in wages! every
railroad in the United States would
have been bankrupt within thirty
days after the wartime government
guarantees were withdrawn"
Senator LaFollette also said:
wages paid railroad employees are
not responsible for the present high
rates of freight but the Esch- Cum
Minis railroad law is responsible"
The Railway Age challenges this
statement as absolutely contrary to
the facts. 1t says: 1.-THE railways
have never spent a dollar to. convince
the public that the increase in
:r,lX
creases in the wages of employees.
What they have done has been to try
to make the public understand that
much the greater part of the increase
in rates has been made necessary by
advances in wages. The indsputable
statistics of the Interstate Commerce
Commission show that out of every
dollar Of increase in the earnings OF
the railways in 1928 over 1916, there
was paid out 81 cents in increased
wages to employees, Z cents in in
creased taxes and not penny in in
creased profits to the owners of the
railways, because the profits were
actually less in 1923 than in 1916. In
spite of the reductions in wages that
| reductions of the number of en-
ployees due to increased efficiency of
operation, the payroll of the railways
! in 1923 was 200 million dollars more
than in 1919, 43O million dollars
more than in 1918, Sl.304, OOO, 900
more than in 1917 and 81, 575, OO0, 900
more than in 1915. And yet Senator
LaFollette, in seeking the votes Of
both railway employees who desire
TO get their present wages increased
and the farmers who desire lower
freight rates has the atfrontery to
say in a public address, wages paid
railroad employees are not response
BILE for the present high rates of
freight. but the Esch- Cummins law is
responsible.' This is one of the fin
est examples Of Il demagOgue running
amuck we have ever SEEM"
Referring to the LaFollette- Wheel
er program of government ownership
of the railways, the Railway Age
says: There could be no bette,
object lesson than has been afford
ed by the experience of the German
railroads. The Prussian railways un-
der the Hohenzollern monarchy were
the best managed state railways in
the world. They made substantial
profits, but among the means used
were the prohibition of railway en-
ployees from belonging to labor un.
ions and from striking and the appli-
cation of a system of voting which
deprived them of political influence.
The establishment of democratic
form of government in Germany fol-
lowing the war resulted in an enor-
nous increase in the. number of EN-
ployees and in the mourning Of vast