EIGHTH ANNUAL YEAR BOOK-PART III. 147 



generally gets the cost of removal paid by those interested in the 

 new location. The farm cannot change its location. 



These differences between the factory and the farmer have had 

 a remarkable effect on the freight rates in this section of the 

 country. 



We are confronted with the fact that there are no natural laws 

 of business which protect the farmer in regard to railroad matters. 

 Practically every reduction that has been brought about on farm 

 products during the past generation, has been done by government 

 interference. Is it strange that the pioneer steps in all these move- 

 ments for government regulation should originate wdth the farmer? 

 It is the natural place for them to originate. And now, while you 

 are interested, let us take a general survey of the situation, and see 

 what problems still confront us. 



You have heard a great deal about rebates lately; that topic has 

 attracted wide attention. A few years ago, a member of the Inter- 

 state Commerce Commission, an attorney for the Cattle Raisers 

 Association, and the governor of a great state, and several other 

 gentlemen who command public esteem, testified before a Congres- 

 sional Committee, that the Elkins law had destroyed all rebating. 

 But scarcely had the sound of their voices died away, when expos- 

 ures in New York and Wisconsin disclosed the fact that rebates 

 amounting into the millions of dollars were still being given and 

 received annually. While this is a great question, to my mind, 

 there is a far greater one. 



I am told that the railroads are discriminating in the furnishing 

 of cars in the state of Iowa. I know that the farmer located at the 

 junction of two or more lines can obtain his cars much easier than 

 the man upon a single road. When a shipper delays a car several 

 days, he pays damages by the day. When the railroad delays the 

 shipper several weeks by the failure to furnish cars, causing a loss 

 of hundreds of dollars to the shipper, the railroad pays nothing. 

 This situation is outrageous and must be rectified; and important 

 as that question is, yet to my mind, there is still a greater one. 



A few months ago a prominent candidate for President of the 

 United States, a member of the Supreme Court of the United 

 States, and several United States Senators came out in published 

 statements, that in their judgments the railroads of this country 

 were not over-capitalized as a w'hole. Those gentlemen have won 

 the confidence of the public. If their statements are correct, there 

 is absolutely no use to make a valuation of all the railroads of the 

 United States by the government. If their statements are not cor- 

 rect, they should be among the first to retract them, because, the 



