Do you know of any particular reason, therefore, why we should favor you with an annual this year?"

The railroads give passes to legislators and public officials not, as a rule, in any spirit of philanthropy or respect for public office, but as a matter of business; and if a legislator does not recognize the obligation that adheres to the pass, the pass is not likely to adhere to him in subsequent years. In many cases the pass is the first step on the road to railroad servitude. Governor Folk said to me: "The railroads debauch legislators at the start by the free pass. It is a misdemeanor by the law of this State to take such a favor. But it seems so ordinary a thing that the legislator takes it. He may start out with good intentions, but he takes a pass and then the railroad people have him in their power. He has broken the law, and if he does not do as they wish they threaten to publish the number of his pass. He generally ends by taking bribe money. He's in the railroad power anyway to a certain extent, and thinks he might as well make something out of it. In investigating cases of corruption I have found that in almost every instance the first step of the legislator toward bribery was the acceptance of a railroad pass."

At the annual dinner of the Boston Merchants' Association, January, 1906, Governor Folk said: "One of our greatest evils is the domination of public affairs by our great corporations, and we will never get rid of corporation dominance till we get rid of the free pass. That is the insidious bribe that carries our legislators over the line of probity. First seduced by the free pass, destruction is easy. No legislator has a right to accept a free pass; no more right than to accept its equivalent in money." Even the laws against the free pass, Governor Folk says, often play into the hands of the railways and emphasize and

2 A number of the States have laws against passes. The Interstate Commerce law forbids them. And they are always against the moral law whether they run beyond the State line or not.

fasten corruption upon the State by putting legislators and officials at the mercy of the railroads in consequence of the fact that the taking of a pass is a violation of law, so that the railway has a special hold upon the donee as soon as the favor is accepted. This is likely to be the effect unless the law is so thoroughly enforced as to prevent the taking of passes, which is very difficult and very seldom achieved.

Governor Folk is doing his best to abolish the pass evil. It used to be a common thing for officials of all grades to ride on passes. And any influential person in Jefferson City could get a pass by seeing a member of the House or Senate, who would send a note to Colonel Phelps and a pass would be forthcoming. Now the legislators decline to accommodate their friends by making these little requests, for the matter might come to the ear of Governor Folk. Moreover the government employees in Missouri have been cut off from these railroad "courtesies." The statute does not apply to appointive officers, but the Governor does not intend that his department shall be honeycombed with railroad influence if he can help it. One of the officers of a subordinate branch of the government went to him and asked him about the matter. "I do not want a pass for myself," said the interrogator, "but Mr. W. told me that he would like for me to see you before he accepted a pass and see if you had any objections. And I want to add, Governor, that it has always been the custom for the employees in this department to use free passes." Governor Folk's countenance lost its smile for the moment, as he said very slowly and sternly: "Tell the employees of your department that if any of my appointees ride upon railway passes they will be instantly discharged."

These insidious bribes in the guise of courtesy and honor for position these free passes which Governor Folk denounces as the first steps to corruption- are prevalent in all our States. Even in honest old Maine, the frosty forest

State, I found the railroad pass in full bloom. Speaking to a joint committee of the House and Senate at Augusta a few months ago, I exhibited a number of photographs of passes given to legislators and councilmen by one of our big railroads. The members examined these photos with much interest and some facetious remarks. On the way into town a famous lobbyist who has long and close acquaintance with the legislature of Maine laughed till the tears ran down his cheeks over the memory of the scene, puffing out between his explosions the explanation of his merriment: "Every one of those fellows has a railroad pass in his own pocket." Inquiry in other directions tends to confirm his statement.

It is hardly possible to imagine that the ordinary legislator or judge can be entirely impartial in reference to a railroad bill or suit when he is under obligation to the railroads for past favors and hopes for similar courtesies in the future.

When a judge finds that jurors in a railroad case have accepted passes from the railroad he discharges the jurors as unfit for impartial service, yet that same judge may have in his pocket an annual pass over all the lines of the road that is plaintiff or defendant in the case.

Some railroad presidents and managers have told me that passes are given as mere courtesies and are not intended to influence the conduct of officials. This may be true in some cases, but as a rule the railroads do not give charity; but expect favor for favor, and value for value, or multiplied value for value. Railroad men have sometimes admitted to me that the psychology of the pass is closely related to

3 In one case it appeared that a leading railroad attorney had been for years in the habit of supplying jurors with passes. Opposing counsel brought out the fact that all the jurors in the case on trial had accepted passes from the railroad company which was the defendant in the case, and that to have an equal chance for justice his client would have to give each juror $50 to offset the railroad gifts. The judge discharged the whole jury.

that of the bribe, and that they sought and obtained political results from the distribution of transportation favors. And aside from such admissions the evidence on the facts is overwhelming.

A prominent judge who had been on the bench for years in one of our best States and had always received passes from various railroad companies, found at the beginning of a new year that one of the principal railroads had failed to send him the customary pass. Thinking it an oversight he called the attention of the railroad's chief attorney to the fact. "Judge," said the lawyer, "did you not recently decide an important case against our company?" "And was not my decision in accordance with law and justice?" said the judge. The attorney did not reply to this, but a few days later the judge got his pass. After some months it again became the duty of the judge to render a decision against the company. This second act of judicial independence was not forgiven. The next time he presented his pass the conductor confiscated it in the presence of many passengers and required the judge to pay his fare.

The railroad commission in one of our giant States says the fact that for the most part passes are given to official persons for the purpose of influencing official conduct, is made manifest by the fact that they are not given to such persons except while they hold official positions." 4

The president of an important railroad is stated to have said that he "saved his company thousands of dollars a year by giving annual passes to county auditors." And a man who had been auditor for many years said that the taxes of the railroad company were increased about $20,000 a year because it was so stingy with its passes.5

4 Condensation of statement of Texas Railroad Commission's Report for 1898, p. 17. See, further, "Bribery by Railway Passes," North American Review, 138, p. 89; and Public Opinion, 26, p. 167, Feb. 9, 1899: "The Pass Evil in Three States" (Indiana, Minnesota, and Washington).

5 " Railway Passes and the Public," Forum, 3, p. 392.

Members of legislatures and of Congress have told me that after voting against railroad measures the usual passes were not forthcoming.

A little while before the introduction of the rate legisla tion now pending, in pursuance of President Roosevelt's regulative policy, a congressman from the Far West was visiting with us. He had free transportation for himself and family anywhere in the United States any time he wanted it. A lady in the family asked him if it was the same way with the rest of the congressmen, and he said "Yes." I have in my notes conversations with senators and representatives from eighteen States, and all of them stated, in reply to my questions, that passes were an established and regular part of the perquisites of a member of Congress.

But since the Esch-Townsend bill for the fixing of rates by a government commission came on deck, I understand that the congressmen who supported it are learning the lesson conveyed in the pass-denying letter above quoted, as some of the railroads are refusing all the requests of such congressmen for free transportation. The president of one of these railroads is reported to have said: "I never was in favor of granting political transportation, and now I have a good opportunity to cut off some of these deadheads. Transportation has been given them in the past on the theory that they were friends, but when we needed friends they were not there.”

This, however, is only a passing phase-an emergency measure to punish a few congressmen who have shown so little appreciation of the right of the railroads to make the laws affecting transportation, that they actually voted for what they deemed right or for what the people desired, rather than for what the railroads wanted.

Aside from such little eddies, the great stream of deadheadism flows on as smooth and deep as ever. The people take the thing so much as a matter of course that it has