f the State in the service of railroad companies
teemed with arguments from the pens of railroad attorneys, and their
columns were profusely supplemented with editorials copied from
prominent corporation papers like the New York _Tribune_, New York
_Times_, New York _World_, Albany _Evening Argus_, Boston _Advertiser_,
and others from various parts of the country.

These papers, attempting to disguise the motives that prompted them to
come to the defense of the Wall Street interest, affected the position
of disinterested and impartial observers. They condemned the proposed
measures as wild and socialistic, and they painted in dark colors the
disasters to railroad property, the injustice to its owners, and
misfortunes to the people of Iowa, that would follow their adoption.
Especially did they bewail the losses that would fall upon the widows
and orphans who had confidingly invested all of their hard earnings in
this property.

They never uttered a word of condemnation, but entirely ignored or
defended the abuses by which the stockholders were robbed at one end of
the line and the patrons were imposed on at the other.

Many of these papers were notified that their statements were altogether
erroneous, but they would not admit a line to their columns in relation
to the matter that indicated any other disposition than complete
subserviency to the interests of Wall Street.

There were, however, an unusual number of strong men in this General
Assembly, and this extraordinary display of railroad forces only tended
to impress more strongly upon them the necessity of curbing the railroad
power, and their best energies were concentrated upon the subject, with
a firm determination to deal with it in a manner dictated by reason and
experience.

So well did the bill which was finally adopted by the committee reflect
the general sentiment of the members of the General Assembly that not a
single vote was cast against it in either house upon its final passage.
Since the adjustment of business under this law, there has been less
friction between the people and the railroads than before for thirty
years, and so satisfactory has it proved to all that no one, not even a
railroad man, has to this day asked the legislature to repeal the law or
any part of it. The act contains no new principle of railroad control.
By far the greater part of its provisions were taken from the old law.
Nearly every one of its features may be found either