Year: 1875




st. Louis Democrat, March 9.


We entirely agree with the RepubH-
can that al efforts thus far made to
regulate railroads by law have failed,
and that the people realize the fact.
But we cannot assent to the idea that
the Massachusetts, plan, of a commits
sion with merely advisory powers, has
proved the best arrangement thus far
tried. Massachusetts, is cursed with
some Of the worst mOnOpolies in the
country. Its local freight rates are in
many cases outrageously high. Com
binatiOn has worked as effectually
against public interest in that State as
in any other. The fatal defect in that
system is that the Legislature only has
any power of control, and no Legisla-
ture that ever has been or Will be as
sembled can possess the practical expe-
renee and knowledge, the brains and
the impartiahty necessary to the wise
regulation of railroads. Repeatedly,
Mr.. Adams, after prolonged and pro-
found study, has urged some measure
of reform, which the dull men who
make laws have been utterly unable to
comprehend. On the other hand, We
suspect from the tone Of his recent
address that continued study and ex-
perience have greatly modified his own
conclusions.


The truth Is, that those only are fit
to control or regulate railroads, who
have a direct pecuniary interest In
their management, and can, therefore,
afford to take the time necessary for
investigation of the conditions under
which each road must be operated.
The law which applies to one road is
utterly inapplicable to another. Diff
ferences of which the law-making pow
er cannot possibly take cOgnizance,
differences which the most pains
taking commissioners can never fully
master, affect very greatly the rates at
which roads can be proftably managed.
The character of freight or travel at
tainable at different seasons; the rela-
tiOns Of the road with others, perhaps
IL distant States, and the relations of
those roads again with others; the cost
of materials, labor, fuel; the nature of
the route as to grades, curves, the soil
on which the road bed is laid, and the
banks or streams adjacent to it, all
these and ten thousand other causes
affect the cost Of transportation. Not
until we can get legislators or commits
sioners of superhuman wisdom and i'm
partiality can the roads of a State be
well regulated by the government. 1t
should be remembered, also, that any
interference whatever, is liable, by in
creasing the cost of managing a road,
or shaking the confidence of its cred
itOTs, and thus affecting the cost at
which 1t can borrow money, to ma
terially injure those very public inter-
ests which it was designed to protect.


If the control of the roads Of any
State, by the government of the State
itself, has been proved practically i'm
possible, consistently with public in
terests, what folly it is TO suppose that
the government Of the United States
can regulate all the railroads Of the
country. The attempt would inevita-
bly, end IN purchase and ownership,
and that either IN such corruption, pee
ulation and mismanagement as to
bring national bankruptcy, or IN the
control Of the railway system, and
through it Of the entire government,
by a small combination Of men direct
ed by consummate ability. No wonder
Mr.. Adams is not prepared to recon-
mend that the government undertake
the management of the roads itself.


The plan which he urged so Jealous.
ly not long ago does not now seem as
satisfactory a solution of difficulties,
we judge. He proposed ownership Of
only one trunk road by the State, rely
ing upon its competition to restrain
rates on other roads. Recent events
have very forcibly illustrated the very
narrow limits to which the effect of
competition between railways is con-
fined. A few terminal points get ben
efts, but at the expense, IN the long
run, of localities along the route. Nor
can the benefits # competition be by
any method permanently assured, even
within narrow limits.


The chief cause Of the failure of all
solutions thus far attempted has been
a want Of thorough understanding of
the nature Of the railroad system. 1t
Is neither exclusively a public service
nor a private business, but partakes of
both. The attempt TO regulate trans
pOrtation as if it were a public service
only, has caused great mischief, be-
cause 1t has Infringed or threatened
vested rights of private business. The
unrestraIned management of roads, S
If transportation were neither more
nor less a private business than any
other, fails because 1t affords no sort Of
protection for public interests. Some
mixed system must be found. in the
whole conduct of the road the public
interests must in some way be repre-
sented, and yet in such a way, and with
such limitations, as to have private in
terest to supply that stimulus to en-
ergy, care and enterprise which only
the hope Of gain can give. The prob
lem has not yet been solved, but this is
the direction IN which the solution
must be sought. Some person or per-
sons representing the public in the
management, as the directors chosen
by Baltimore represent that city in the
Baltimore and Ohio, hut with powers
so defined and limited that they can
demand benefits for the public only
consistent with a reasonable measure Of
private advantage, might perhaps prove
of service. Ono thingis certain, a rail-
road can no more be regulated by a
power outside of 1t than a steamer can
be steered by a man sitting on the
hank