fr s quite probable they have carried this policy too far; that they have been much too deferential to the demagogues who harass them; have offered too little resistance to acts of injustice and oppression. Indeed, their timidity has oftentimes been so marked that it has suggested attack-has invited interference and oppression. 20 Vol. 8 CHAPTER XVI. LOCAL AND THROUGH TRAFFIC-STATE VS. INTERSTATE-IMPOSSIBILITY OF DISTINGUISHING ONE FROM THE OTHER-EFFECT ON LEGISLATIVE The accompanying reflections in regard to State and interstate traffic are suggested by the divided duty that attaches to national and local supervision of railways, and the impossibility, in many instances, of determining where the jurisdiction of one begins and the other ends. The subject attaches to governmental supervision in America, and in other countries where federal and State authority exist side by side. It also treats incidentally of the inter-road traffic of railways. The theme is a practical one, of interest to those connected with railroads or concerned in their affairs. When Percy was told that Glendower could call spirits from the vasty deep, he replied that he could also call them, but would they come? Legislation that assumes that the traffic of railroads may be classified upon the basis of State lines, excites in those familiar with the subject a feeling of incredu lity akin to that which the boast of Glendower excited in the breast of Hotspur. It can not be done. State traffic refers to business confined wholly within a State; interstate business to that which passes from one State to another. The difference is simple enough. But the separation of the two is as idealistic as calling spirits from the vasty deep. The incorporeal spirits that hovered around the romantic Glendower were not more incapable of separate identity than State and interstate business in many In considering legislative supervision of interstate traffic, it seems not to have occurred to those having the matter in charge that there would be any difficulty in distinguishing one from the other. But such is the case. The traffic of a country is homogeneous. It leaves no more connected or recognizable trace of its presence or methods than does the swallow in its flight or the vessel in its course; it takes no more account of State lines than the winds or clouds take account of them. It has no separate identity, except in the private practices of individuals. The difficulty of classifying a thing so intertwined and indistinguishable as the traffic of a State, is experienced in all countries. It is an inherent difficulty, based on the idiosyncrasies of men, the accidents of business, the fluctuations and vagaries of trade. It is aggravated by the peculiarities of railway construction, location, extent, service, traffic, * This indivisibility will, it is believed by many, have the effect to cement the relations existing between the officials of the general government and the State governments; will, in fact, ultimately render their consolidation necessary. arrangements with surrounding lines, the talent, experience, and adaptability of those who operate them. I will enumerate some of the things that prevent a separation of the traffic of a nation on imaginary or arbitrary lines. And first, in order to separate local from through traffic, it is essential that all business (including passenger as well as freight), shall be followed in the accounts, from the point of departure to the place of final destination. Whenever this is not done, or can not be done, the separation will be doubtful and at best only partial. A bag of potatoes consigned to a merchant at Syracuse, N.Y., shipped from Utica, N. Y., is presumably State traffic, but the passenger ticketed from Syracuse to New York City, while apparently local, may, in reality, be pursuing an uninterrupted journey to some remote State or Territory. Herein lies the difficulty in a nutshell. The devices of railroads for handling their traffic are such as their necessities impose, coupled with the legitimate requirements of business. Each road is compelled to treat the bulk of its traffic as an entity; as if it originated and terminated upon its line. It is not practicable to do otherwise. In a country of restricted territory, like that of Great Britain, where the mileage of railroads is relatively small and communication between the most remote points requires but a few hours, it would seem as if traffic might be billed through without serious risk or expense to the carrier. But it can not. The exceptions are both general and marked. In the |