ger with the water-power company on the Kennebec River in Maine, after it had been sold out; with the Cohoes Water-power Company, on the Mohawk River, before it was sold; with the Lewiston Waterpower Company at the time it was sold; and with the Indian Orchard Water-power Company subsequently to the sale, each possessing land and water-power for sale, and during the long period of his connection with these companies there never was a single application made by any person for the purchase or lease of a spoonful of water, except on the part of companies which were themselves promoted by the owners of the water-power for the purpose of attempting to develop the land connected therewith. It would, perhaps, be worth while to look into the present condition of the water-power at Augusta, Ga., and at Columbia, S. C.

"It may be said that water-power has never paid for its development on a large scale, and there is now less incentive to develop it, since steam power has become so cheap, than at the time when these enterprises were begun. If the factories which now exist at several of these places were now to be built, it is very certain that they would not be placed where they are, but at some intermediate point between the great commercial cities, where they could be operated by steam, reached at less expense for freight, and more readily supervised by the managers.

"It is not denied that water-power upon the small streams, where dams and canals can be built at moderate expense, is an extremely valuable adjunct to the factories placed thereby, and that water is essential, aside from power, in the manufacture of woolen goods and of paper; but it may nevertheless be said that water-power, developed for the purpose of its power only, is to-day practically without salable value in any degree approaching the cost of dams, canals, etc., if the expense be anything more than the excavation of a canal in easy ground, and the developing of very simple and inexpensive works connected therewith."

One of the leading manufacturers of the State has expressed the opinion that no water-power sixty miles from the sea-board is worth taking the gift of, for the manufacture of any kind of material brought from outside the State, the freight charges on raw material, other supplies, and product for that distance being more than enough to balance any advantage which water-power has over steam with coal at tide-water prices. This may be

doubted, but it will not be contended by any one that the value of an inland water-power is such that it can, in these days of sharp competition and close margins, be profitably utilized without cheap and prompt railroad service, or that high freights are not prohibitory of the many manufactures in which motive power is but a small item in the expense account.

Again, the natural attractions of our State as a summer resort can only be made to contribute as they should to our material progress by the erection of large and costly hotels and boarding-houses, and these are scarcely to be had unless owners, while erecting them and establishing a reputation for them, receive substantial encouragement from the railroads in the way of concessions on freight bills.

The logical conclusion from this is that the province of a New Hampshire railroad is creative as well as executive, and that its discriminations, if any, should be in freights in favor of those who establish the enterprises to which it must look for support. But it is otherwise written in our statutes. Chapter 163, sections 2 and 5, of the General Laws provides:

66

SECT. 2. The rates shall be the same for all persons and for like descriptions of freight between the same points; such prices shall not be raised until after thirty days' notice posted as aforesaid. All persons shall have reasonable and equal terms, facilities, and accommodations for the transportation of themselves, their agents and servants, and of any merchandise and other property, upon any railroad owned or operated in this State, and for the use of the depot and other buildings and grounds of such corporation, and, at any point of intersection of two railroads, reasonable and equal terms and facilities of interchange."

"SECT. 5. Season tickets, by the quarter or other specified time, may be sold at reduced rates; and special rates may be established for passengers to attend agricultural fairs, public meetings, and parties of pleasure, and for military and other organized companies."

In this prohibition of discriminations, the exceptions,

so far as it relates to passengers, are so broad and so many that it has little practical application to fares; but there is no exception in regard to freights. A railroad may carry people to a horse trot, a circus, or a muster for half fare or a merely nominal fare and be blameless, but if it induces a man to establish a factory, a shop, or a hotel in Northern New Hampshire by giving him less freight rates than are paid by others in the same locality, it violates the law and is liable to a fine of $500. It may legally sell a man a mileage ticket for two thirds the regular rate that will take him out of the State to buy shoes, but if it contracts to carry shoes for him from the State, on condition that he will make them in Concord, for two thirds the rate charged for carrying the same description of freight from the state line to Concord, only public opinion and the remissness of public officials save it from punishment. This, too, in a State that is committed by law and custom to the policy of exempting from taxation and otherwise encouraging new enterprises that will add to its wealth and population.

Is it too much to say that some of our railroads and very many of our mountain villages owe their existence to a violation of this law, or that it has been constantly broken by universal consent? If not, why not amend it, at least to the extent of adopting the qualification of the Interstate Commerce Act of Congress, which provides for equal terms and facilities under substantially similar circumstances and conditions?

With maximum freights fixed by a state commission, with publicity of all rates provided for, and with discriminations for or against patrons similarly situated strictly prohibited, unless there is need of protecting stockholders from the disposition of railroad managers to serve the public too cheaply, we do not conceive it to be necessary to make it a misdemeanor for a railroad

corporation to coax business upon its line by offering it special inducements to locate there.

Rates should be equal under similar circumstances and conditions, and they should be public; but an ironclad law intended to make them equal regardless of circumstances and conditions, while it may be warranted by general principles that are sound, is not in line with the policy adopted by New Hampshire in other matters, and experience has shown that it cannot be enforced.

The Interstate Commerce Act passed by the Fortyninth Congress has an important bearing upon the railroad business of this State and the work of this Board. It asserts the right and purpose of the National Legislature to regulate interstate railway traffic. It defines an interstate railroad and creates a national commerce commission. It prohibits pooling and rebates, and provides that rates for the transportation of persons and property shall be equal under substantially similar circumstances and conditions, and not less for a long than for a short haul over the same line in the same direction. Under the definition given in this act, all but one of our standard-gauge railways are interstate, each of them being part of a system operated under one management and extending across the state line. The law of Congress applies to them all. Besides this, it is probably to some extent restrictive of the exercise of the powers which have hitherto been exerted by the State, acting through its courts and commissions, for the control and regulation of railroad business within its boundaries, without regard to the question whether such business was domestic or interstate. The exercise of such powers has had as a warrant only the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States that "until

Congress acts in reference to the relations of this [a] company to interstate commerce, it is certainly within the power of [a state] Wisconsin to regulate its fares, etc., so far as they are matters of domestic concern." And this has been so strictly construed by the same court that it has unanimously held, in all recent cases, that the right of the several States to control in these matters is entirely dependent upon the non-action of Congress. The law as established by this our highest tribunal is:

"The power to regulate interstate commerce vested in Congress is the power to prescribe the rules by which it shall be governed, - that is, the conditions upon which it shall be conducted, - to determine when it shall be free and when it shall be subject to duties or other exactions. The power also embraces within its control all the instrumentalities by which that commerce may be carried on, and the means by which it may be aided and encouraged. While with reference to subjects which are local and limited in their nature or sphere of operation, the States may prescribe regulations until Congress intervenes and assumes control of them; yet when they are national in their character and require uniformity of regulation, affecting alike all the States, the power of Congress is exclusive." - Opinion of Justice Field, April 13, 1885.

66

And again: If, in the absence of congressional action, the States may continue to regulate matters of local interest, only incidentally affecting foreign and interstate commerce, such as pilots, harbors, roads, bridges, tolls, freights, etc., the power is exclusive whenever the matter is national in its character or admits of one uniform system or plan of regulation." —Justice Bradley, May 4, 1885.

This is the law of the land which must govern the through business of every New Hampshire railroad except the Profile & Franconia Notch and Mount Washington, and possibly the Whitefield & Jefferson. It follows that much which this Board is asked and expected to do is beyond its power, or that of the State which created it, and that some things that might have been done by us before the passage of the interstate commerce law