rstate Bill just as I do. What do you mean
by saying it might prove our salvation?" he asked, abruptly, turning to
Forrest.

"I was simply supposing a case," said Forrest, calmly. "Say that the
Granger element in one State, the Populists in another, the Socialists
in a third, were to obtain control of the legislature and elect their
own governor. You say they are utterly antagonistic to the railways;
that in the event of a general strike, mob violence, etc., they would
refuse you help or protection; that as common carriers you would be
powerless to carry out your contracts, and that not only passenger and
freight traffic would be blocked, but the government mails. Now, prior
to February, '87, the general government, as I understand it, had left
the management of the railways to the States. It had neither formulated
laws for their control nor adopted measures for their protection. In the
great railway riots of '77, when the police and militia were whipped and
cowed by the mobs, such States as Pennsylvania and Illinois begged for
government aid and got it. Our troops were called in from the Rocky
Mountains to Chicago, and from Louisiana to Pittsburg. In the riots at
Buffalo, three years ago, New York's fine National Guard, and in those
at Homestead the Pennsylvania division, were sufficient to put an end to
the mischief, and neither State had to ask for help; but here lies
within your limits far greater possibility for riot and bloodshed than
can be found elsewhere in the Union, and suppose that to pander to the
masses here, as he has done in pardoning the Anarchists, your governor
should deny you protection and permit assault, riot, and violence
whenever you attempted to move engines or trains. It is my belief that
you can now look where you could not before the passage of that
Interstate Commerce Bill in '870 for the protection denied you at home.
When the Congress of the United States enacted that 'every common
carrier should, according to their respective powers, afford all
reasonable, proper, and equal facilities for the interchange of traffic
between their respective lines,'--I am quoting now,--'and for receiving,
forwarding, and delivery of passengers and property to and from their
several lines,' the supreme power of the land asserted its right to
assume control over all roads except those doing business exclusively
within the limits of some one State; and when the general government
says to a common carrier that