And State Papers 113 



Idaho, New York, Illinois, South Carolina, can all 

 come together for certain purposes, and yet each 

 be allowed to work out its salvation as it desires 

 along certain other lines. On the whole, this has 

 worked well ; but in some respects it has worked ill. 

 While I most firmly believe in fixity of policy, I do 

 not believe that that policy should be fossilized, and 

 when conditions change we must change our gov 

 ernmental methods to meet them. I believe with 

 all my heart in the New England town meeting, 

 but you can't work the New England town meeting 

 in Boston it is too big. You must devise some 

 thing else. If you look back in the history of Bos 

 ton you will find that Boston was very reluctant to 

 admit this particular truth for some time in the first 

 decades of the nineteenth century. When this gov 

 ernment was founded there were no great individ 

 ual or corporate fortunes, and commerce and in 

 dustry were being carried on very much as they had 

 been carried on in the days when Nineveh and Baby 

 lon stood in the Mesopotamian Valley. Sails, oars, 

 wheels these were the instruments of commerce. 

 The pack train, the wagon train, the rowboat, the 

 sailing craft these were the methods of commerce. 

 Everything has been revolutionized in the business 

 world since then, and the progress of civilization 

 from being a dribble has become a torrent. There 

 was no particular need at that time of bothering 

 as to whether the nation or the State had control of 

 corporations. They were easy to control. Now, how 

 ever, the exact reverse is the case. And remember 



