the legitimate fruit of indiscriminate
railway building and offers the only escape from the
conditions such practice engenders. I shall show that, while
it is assumed that rates may be based progressively or
otherwise on distance, the enforcement of such a principle
would restrict the source of supply, and, in so far as this
was the case, render great markets or centers of industry
impossible."

Speaking of the importance of the railroad, Mr. Kirkman says:
"Superseding every other form of inland conveyance, it determines the
location of business centers, and vitalizes by its presence, or blasts
by its absence." He contends that rigid and scrutinizing supervision
should be exercised by the Government over the location of railroads,
and that only such lines should be permitted to be built as afford
reasonable grounds for profitable enterprise. "It should be," he says,
"an axiom in our day that a government that permits or encourages the
construction of two railways where one would suffice is, to the extent
that it does this, a public nuisance." Mr. Kirkman here makes it the
duty of the Government to arbitrarily meddle with railroad affairs. He
would give the Government the power to determine when and where an
additional railroad is needed, and to prohibit the construction of any
new road that has not the Government sanction. The interests of a
thousand towns might suffer for want of adequate transportation
facilities, individuals and communities might be anxious to build their
own lines for the development of local resources, but all railroad
enterprise is doomed to a standstill until a conservative governmental
commission has been entirely satisfied that a prospected road will pay
and not deprive existing roads of any part of their revenue. There can
be no doubt that if such a policy were ever adopted in America, few
roads would be built without having first passed the ordeal of a legal
injunction, and many a prospected road, though greatly needed, would
remain unbuilt because its promoters would be discouraged by the delay
and cost of litigation.

But while this author is perfectly willing to trust the Government with
the great responsibility of prohibiting the construction of proposed
roads, he is not willing to have it exercise the power to determine what
are reasonable rates. He tries to sustain his objection by the following
argument: "The fixing of rates upon a railroad