RAILWAY LEGISLATION 137 



sentative of their opinions. It objected particularly to Ham- 

 mond, who was stigmatized as a pretended representative of 

 the farmer's interests but in reality " a political bummer." 1 



Immediately after it was organized the board issued a call to 

 the railroad companies for reports on gross earnings and mileage, 

 which could be used as a basis for classification under the law 

 regulating passenger fares. Four of the principal companies 

 responded with a joint communication declaring 



that while the companies do not recognize the validity of the law under 

 which your Honorable Board was appointed, so far as it attempts to impose 

 upon these companies additional duties and obligations; yet we are willing 

 to furnish such information as the mode of doing our business makes rea- 

 sonable and practicable. 



A hope was also expressed that speedy steps would be taken to 

 test the validity of the new laws in the courts. By October 

 reports were received from all but three of the twenty-one roads 

 of the state, although nearly all of these were prefaced by state- 

 ments denying the validity of the law and declaring all rights 

 of the companies to be reserved. Using the information con- 

 tained in these resports, the board proceeded to classify the 

 railroads upon the basis of gross earnings, in accordance with 

 the law. This classification was notified to the companies and 

 was also given publicity through the newspapers. 2 



It is impossible to say just what immediate effects, if any, 

 this classification had upon passenger fares in the state. Cer- 

 tainly the leading roads, which were required by the law to reduce 

 their fares to two and a half and three cents per mile (classes 

 A and B), did not observe the law; but the board reported that 

 complaints about passenger fares were fewer and less intense 

 than formerly, because of a liberal use of commutation and 



1 Prairie Farmer, xli. 213. Commissioner Morgan declared in March, 1873, 

 that Mr. Koerner, the chairman and legal member of the commission, was early 

 found to be acting in the interests of the railroad companies and a drag upon all 

 efforts of the other members to enforce the law. Chicago Tribune, March 15, 1873, 

 p. 3. Morgan seems to have had the support of the farmers. Resolutions recom- 

 mending his re-appointment were adopted by a Livingston County convention of 

 farmers and by the State Farmers' Association. Ibid., January 10, 1873, P* 5J 

 Prairie Farmer, xliv. 26 (January 25, 1873). 



2 Railroad Commission, Reports, 1871, pp. 1-6, 55-60, 63, 71-156. 



