thorough
and well-planned measure, but failed to receive the approval of Congress
because a majority of its members considered it too radical a measure.
The bill contained many of the provisions of the present Interstate
Commerce Act, including the anti-pooling and the long and short haul
clauses; but instead of creating a commission it lodged in the courts,
both State and Federal, the power to enforce the law.

Other bills were introduced from year to year, but during a period of
nine years none of them drew sufficient votes to make it a law. Congress
may be said to have been divided into three camps upon the railroad
question, viz.: those who favored the system of regulation proposed by
Mr. Reagan, those who favored the commissioner system and those who were
opposed to every mode of Federal regulation of interstate commerce. In
the meantime, the inactivity of Congress caused considerable
restlessness among the people, and the demand for action became louder
every year. The issue entered into politics, and a number of Western
Congressmen owed their failure to be re-elected to their indifference or
enmity to Federal railroad legislation.

On March 21st, 1885, under authority of a resolution adopted by the
Senate of the United States, the President of the Senate appointed a
select committee to investigate and report upon the subject of the
regulation of the transportation of freight and passengers between the
several States by railroad and water routes. Senator Cullom, of
Illinois, became its chairman. The committee examined a large number of
witnesses, including railroad managers and shippers, addressed letters
to the railroad commissioners of the several States, to boards of trade,
chambers of commerce, State boards of agriculture, Patrons of Husbandry,
Farmers' Alliances, etc., and made every effort to obtain the opinions
of those who had given special attention to the transportation problem.

The report of the committee was submitted to the Senate on January 18,
1886. Concerning the abuses of railroad transportation it differed but
little from that of the Windom committee. The report declared publicity
to be the best remedy for unjust discrimination and recommended that
the posting of rates and public notice of all changes in tariffs be
required. It also recommended that a greater charge for a shorter than a
longer haul be made presumptive evidence of an unjust discrimination,
and that a national commission be esta