ions are founded upon the very principle of equal rights
to all. A good anecdote is related which well illustrates this feeling.
A farmer and a lawyer occupied the same seat in a railroad car. When the
conductor came the farmer presented his ticket, and the lawyer a pass.
The farmer's features did not conceal his disgust when he discovered
that his seat-mate was a deadhead. The lawyer, trying to assuage the
indignation of the observing granger, said to him: "My friend, you
travel very cheaply on this road." "I think so myself," replied the
farmer, "considering the fact that I have to pay fare for both of us."

But what must be a passenger's surprise when he finds that the judge who
to-morrow is to preside at the trial of a case in which the railroad
company is a party to-day accepts free transportation at its hands. A
judge may scorn the charge that he is influenced by a railroad pass, but
his fellow-passenger who has paid his fare cannot understand why the
railroad company should give passes to one class of people and refuse
them to others, if it does not consider one more than others to be in a
position to reciprocate its favors.

In their endeavor to win over the courts, however, the railroads do by
no means confine their attention to the judges. They are well aware that
a biased jury is often more useful to them than a biased judge, and
efforts are made by them to contaminate juries, or at least prejudice
them in their favor. A prominent Iowa attorney, the legal and political
factotum of a large railroad corporation, for years made it a practice
to supply jurors with passes. In one instance, when it was shown in
court by the opposing counsel that all jurors in the case on trial had
accepted passes from the railroad company which was the defendant in the
case, the judge found himself compelled to discharge the whole jury. The
argument made by this counsel, in support of his motion that the jury be
discharged, was certainly to the point. He showed that in order to have
an equal chance for justice it would be necessary for his client to give
each juror at least fifty dollars to offset the bribes given to them by
the railroad company.

That it has always been the policy of railroad managers to propitiate
the judiciary is a fact too generally known among public men to admit of
contradiction. If a judge owes his nomination or election to railroad
influences, railroad managers feel that they have in this a guarantee of
l