Year: 1876

passing through the States, and to reg
ulate interstate commerce, In tn,
case OF Gray VS., The Clinton Bridgs
Company, in the Supreme Court ol
the United States, Justice Miller used
the following language:


For myself, have no doubt Of the right Of
Congress to prescribe all needful and proper reg
ulations for the conduct Of this immense traffic
over any railroad which has voluntarily become
a part Of one Of those lines Of interstate commu.
nication, or to authorize tho creation of such
roads when the purposes OF interstate transpor.
tatiOn of persons and property justify and re.
quire IL. fll0


If natural highways, such as rivers
and lakes, are entitled to aid from the
Government, and this is not doubted
who shall say that the Government
has not equally the power to aid by
appropriate legislation artificial high.
ways Of commerce, such as railways
aud canals


The certainty which Government
control or rather such control as Is
contemplated by this bill, by persons
selected by the several States through
which the road may pass, will give to
the rates of transportation, will 80
largely increase the productions of the
West and Northwest that reduced
rates, rates as low as any that can be
furnished by water communication,
will assure TO railroads a remuneratiye
income, and more especially so TO the
road contemplated by this bill, which,
with the wise provisions contained in
it against fraudulent practices in its
construction and management, will not
be encumbered by the incubus of an
excess OF liabilities above its actual
cost of construction.


The producer and his labor create
the wealth OF the country, and yet he
generally is poor, while the purchaser
and consumer is enabled TO enjoy all
the advantages afforded by wealth,
simply because the fruits of the pro
ducers toll cannot reach a market
where they may be disposed of at re-
munerative prices, on account of the
lack of cheap transportation. OF what
advantage is all the agricultural and
mineral wealth of the great West and
Northwest if it can find no market
Statistics have been produced here to
show that corn forwarded from the
West to an eastern market has netted
the producer but eight cents q bushel,
while the carrying company's charges
were six tunes US great and another
case in which an Iowa farmer forward
ed his corn at q cost of sixty. seven
cents bushel and received for il sixty
eight cents q bushcl thus leaving him
profit of one cent bushel TO COM
pensate him for his labor, the interest
on his invested capital, and his current
and necessary expenses. In every
case, therefore, 1t is safe to say, the
producer, who represents the large
majority Of our people, is the man who
is made to suffer; and the same is true
TO some extent with the consumer,
while the transportation companies
grow rich at the expense Of both pro-
ducer and consumer. Monopolies are
never beneficial to any except those
who ENJOY the special privilege of be-
ing the monopolists; and this is class
in every community which can we'll
be dispensed with to the great advan-
tage of the public.


1t may be claimed that tho bill un-
der consideration is monopoly in
itself. This is not the case. Ii makes
no provision to monopolize the traffic
in freight, but simply through its board
Of managers, who will be the repre-
sentativcs OF the people and the peo-
pies interests, regulate the charges for
freight so as not to oppress those for
whom the Government has been cs-
tablished, and without whom the Gov
eminent can neither prosper nor main.
tain its existence, and adopt such
tarift OF rates as will enable the pro-
ductions Of the West to be shipped TO
tne seaooard, ana Dc sold at such
prices as WI, yieiu a ia'r proht TO the
producer ana impose no oxtravagant
charges upon Tue consumer IL IS not
a monopoly, ana does not propose 10
lake any steps toward monopollzlng
tramc ram ~ any manner whatever Its
Seslgn u : measure 81 rehei 70 the SUI,
,ering ciuzens 81 poth East and west
Dy furnishing transportation Tor the