ow their
instinct, will despotically control all the business tributary to it,
with unlimited power to build up and tear down, to punish its enemies
and to reward its friends.

It is not true that State control checks railroad building. While it may
prevent the construction of useless lines and discourage speculation, it
will encourage the building of roads for which there is a legitimate
demand. Stockholders as a whole do not participate in the management of
the roads and do not profit by railroad abuses, the origin of which may
almost invariably be traced to selfish designs on the part of a few
entrusted with the management of the property. Where through wise
legislation these abuses are prevented, the roads are managed in the
interest of all the stockholders, develop business and enjoy lasting
prosperity.

It may be laid down as a general rule that the policy which best
subserves the interests of the patrons of a road is always the best
policy for its owners. Injustice to a railroad will interfere with its
usefulness; injustice to shippers depresses production and consumption;
and in either case both the road and its patrons will suffer. State
control is therefore as much needed in the interest of the owners of
railroads as in the interest of their patrons. What should be the nature
of such control will be discussed hereafter. A full understanding of the
question at issue, however, makes necessary an inquiry into the various
abuses which unrestrained railroad management of the past has developed.
Perhaps no better presentation of the evils and abuses of railroads and
their consequences can be found than that contained in the report of the
Senate Committee on Interstate Commerce, submitted by Senator Cullom, in
1886. This report charges:

1. That local rates are unreasonably high, as compared with through
rates.

2. That local and through rates are unreasonably high at non-competing
points, either from the absence of competition or in consequence of
pooling agreements that restrict its operation.

3. That rates are established without apparent regard to the actual cost
of the service performed, and are based largely on "what the traffic
will bear."

4. That unjustifiable discriminations are constantly made between
individuals in the rates charged for like service under similar
circumstances.

5. That improper discriminations are constantly made between articles of
freight and branches of business of a like c