may be, and is, seriously questioned by students of railway transportation; but that is not the problem before us. We are concerned simply with the facts of the law, and these facts clearly and unequivocally reveal a wide disparity between the provisions of law and the facts of railway development.

Pooling. Both the interstate-commerce act and the antitrust law prohibit pooling. The TransMissouri Freight Association, the Joint Traffic Association,1 and other cases have finally decided the illegality of all combinations, just or unjust, good or bad, for the maintenance and control of rates, the restraint of competition or the arbitrary interference in any other way with the free play of competitive forces. For many years pooling was a favorite and one of the most efficient agencies in checking destructive competition and in maintaining reasonable rates and equitable relations among railways. Less than one-half of the states have prohibitive legislation, directly or indirectly, on the subject of pooling, and only about a dozen prohibit this practice.

"That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act to enter into any contract, agreement, or combination with any other common carrier or carriers for the pooling of freight of different and competing railroads, or divide between them the aggregate or net proceeds of the earnings of such railroads, or any por1 See pages 240-242.

tion thereof; and in the case of an agreement for the pooling of freight rates as aforesaid, each day of its continuance shall be deemed a separate offence."

In words identical with or similar to these, the pooling of freight or the division of business is prohibited in Arkansas, California, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin.

A group of states, a little smaller than the one just given, contains laws bearing less directly and rigidly upon pooling contracts. The New York law, for instance, authorizes the railroad commission to gather information on contracts and agreements entered into between railway companies. The laws of North and South Carolina make it the duty of their respective commissions to examine and approve or disapprove the contracts among railways. In Vermont the commission is charged with the prevention of unlawful combinations to increase rates. Similar administrative supervision of contracts is provided for in the laws of Florida, Georgia, New Hampshire, Texas, and Ohio. More than one-half of the states have, consequently, no laws regulating pooling.

Tickets: Scalping, Redemption of Unused Tickets, Passes. The public has long been familiar with arguments for and against ticket brokerage, commonly called scalping. Irrespective of the merits of the arguments on either side, the fact can hardly be disputed that scalping may seriously reduce the

revenue of railways, become an agency of discriminations and other abuses, and in the hands of weak roads provide the latter the means through which they may dictate, in a measure, at least, to the stronger and larger systems. In all but a dozen states, ticket brokerage is extra-legal; that is, the law has ignored the subject, unless we unduly extend the meaning of such general provisions as that found in the laws of California, that railways shall provide tickets. In Connecticut the railway commission may regulate the sale of tickets and prescribe hours during which ticket offices may do business. South Dakota stands alone in that it expressly authorizes scalping. "Any person having an established place of business . . . shall have the right to buy, sell, and exchange passage tickets. ... Any person purchasing a ticket from the authorized office . . . shall have the right to sell his ticket or tickets to any person doing business under this act."1 Villages and cities may, however, regulate this business by law. Not nearly so wide in its scope is the Alabama provision licensing ticket brokers on paying a fee of $50 in towns of 10,000 or over. In smaller towns a fee of $20 is exacted. In Colorado all tickets are transferable. They are limited as to time, but not as to person.

On the question of free transportation and passes, New Jersey occupies a position as unique as that of South Dakota, in that the laws of this 1 Rev. Stat., 1899, §§ 3950, 3951.

state enumerate certain state officers who shall be permitted to ride free. Most of the states that have legislated on scalping have in the same act inserted provisions relating to the redemption of unused or unused portions of tickets. The lists are not entirely identical, scalping being prohibited without providing for the redemption of tickets, and vice versa, in a few states. The nature of legislation of this kind may be illustrated by the following: 1

"SECTION I. No person other than a duly authorized agent of the railroad company issuing the same, shall sell, offer for sale, or rent any railroad mileage book or any coupons therefrom, or any other railroad tickets limited to the use of a person or persons thereon specified at the time of its issuance by the railroad company, under a penalty of not less than $10 nor more than $100 for each offence, to be recovered on complaint.

"SECTION 2. No person other than the one specified in any railroad mileage book or other railroad ticket limited to the use of the person or persons specified thereon at the time of its issuance by the railroad company, shall offer for passage or in payment for transportation on any railroad any such mileage book or coupons therefrom, or any other railroad ticket limited as aforesaid, under a penalty of not less than $1 nor more than $10 for each offence, to be recovered on complaint.

1 Laws of Maine, 1899, ch. 69.

"SECTION 3. Any railroad company which shall issue a mileage book limited to the person or persons named therein, shall, upon presentation thereof by the person to whom such book was issued or his legal representatives, at some one or more of its principal stations in each county through which its road runs, to be designated by such company, at any time after one year from the time when such book was issued, redeem all the coupons then attached to such book at the same rate per mile as such mileage book was sold at."

A similar law passed by the legislature of New York has recently been declared unconstitutional. Other states prescribing the sale of railway tickets through authorized officers are: Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, Iowa, Texas, and Pennsylvania. In Montana the railway company must provide its agents with certificates which, when presented to the secretary of state, entitle the holder to a certificate authorizing him to sell tickets for the railway in question on the payment of $1. Selling tickets without such a license is unlawful.

The redemption of unused or unused portions of tickets has been provided for by law in Pennsylvania since 1863. Other states having statutory requirements to this effect are Alabama, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota.

Laws governing the free transportation, or transportation at reduced rates, of certain persons or classes of persons, have been enacted in less