CHAPTER I EVENTS PRECEDING THE ACT TO REGULATE COMMERCE, 1887 DURING the first half of the nineteenth century federal railway legislation dealt chiefly with rights of way through public lands, and with the remission of duties on railway materials imported from abroad. The Pacific railway agitation was begun during the first and continued into the third quarter of the century. The first land grant act was passed in 1850.1 In 1866 the "charter of the American railway system" became a law. It provided that "every railroad company in the United States whose road is operated by steam, be and is hereby authorized to carry upon and over its road, boats, bridges, and ferries, all passengers, troops, government supplies, mails, freight, and property, on their way from any state to another state, and to receive compensation therefor; and to connect with roads of other states so as to form continuous lines for the transportation of the same to the place of destination." In 1868 the House com 1 J. B. Sanborn, Congressional Grants of Land in Aid of Railways, Bulletin, University of Wisconsin, Vol. II. no. 3, in Economics, Political Science and History Series. mittee on roads and canals - the new committee to handle railway legislation did not appear until several years later-submitted a report in which strong reasons were advanced in favor of a liberal interpretation of the powers of congress over interstate commerce.1 The committee had been instructed to inquire whether congress had power to regulate interstate railways so as to secure safety of passengers, uniform and equitable rates, and adequate connections with other railways. An affirmative answer was given to every one of these points of inquiry, but the committee did not report a bill. This they refused to do because the requisite facts for the drafting of such a bill were not at hand. Instead, it was recommended that another committee be appointed to collect the data necessary for intelligent action. Meanwhile the Patrons of Husbandry had come upon the scene. From 1867 to 1872 the founders of the order struggled chiefly alone. In 1872 the state grange of Iowa was founded, and by the close of that year about thirteen hundred granges had been organized in various parts of the country. In two years more the order had spread over the whole country, with an aggregate of over 20,000 lodges. In 1874 the Grand Master's address 2 alluded to exorbitant and varying rates, discriminations, and uncertainties. "When we plant a crop 1 E. J. James, The Railway Question, Am. Ec. Ass'n, 1887. 2 Proceedings, National Grange of Patrons of Husbandry, 1874, P. 14. we can only guess what it will cost to send it to market, for we are the slaves of those whom we created. . . In our inmost soul we feel deeply wronged at the return made for the kind and liberal spirit we have shown them" (i.e. the railways). Sentiments like these, frequently expressed in vehement language and repeated time without number in subordinate granges, created a profound influence on public opinion and political parties. Congress was petitioned to establish a department of agriculture, to revise the patent laws, improve the Mississippi River, and above all to enact suitable railway legislation. "We hold each senator and representative responsible for his action upon the subject-matter" set forth in the resolutions. The President's message of December, 1872, gave the stimulus to the appointment of a Senate committee of seven known as the Windom committee. The report of this committee "is interesting because it contains the first presentation of a comprehensive plan of regulation of the whole subject of commerce between the states, as it has constituted itself since the introduction of the railway." The primary view of the report was low rates and the preservation of competition. The crisis of 1873 tended to divert attention from discriminations and other abuses to the absolute level of rates, it being assumed that cheap rates would afford relief. Among the measures recommended by the Windom committee were publicity 1 E. J. James, The Railway Question, p. 35. |