stly
increased number of civil servants, the party in possession
of the Federal administration at the time such ownership was
assumed would be able to perpetuate its power
indefinitely.... This objection would seem to be well taken,
and indicates serious and far-reaching results unless some
way can be devised to neutralize the political power of such
a vast addition to the official army.... In the military
service we have a body of men that exerts little or no
political power, as the moment a citizen enters the army he
divests himself of political functions; and it is not
hazardous to say that 700,000 capable and efficient men can
be found who, for the sake of employment, to be continued so
long as they are capable and well behaved, will forego the
right to take part in political affairs. If a sufficient
number of such men can be found, this objection would, by
proper legislation, be divested of all its force....

"2. That there would be constant political pressure to make
places for the strikers of the party in power, thus adding a
vast number of useless men to the force, and rendering it
progressively more difficult to effect a change in the
political complexion of the administration.

"That this objection has much less force than is claimed is
clear from the conduct of the postal department, which is
unquestionably a political adjunct of the administration;
yet but few useless men are employed, while its conduct of
the mail service is a model of efficiency after which the
corporate-managed railways might well pattern. Moreover, if
the railways are put under non-partisan control, this
objection will lose nearly, if not quite, all its force.

"3. That the service would be less efficient and cost more
than with continued corporate ownership. This appears to be
bare assertion, as from the very nature of the case there
can be no data outside those furnished by the
government-owned railways of the British colonies, and such
data negative these assertions; and the advocates of
national ownership are justified in asserting that such
ownership would materially lessen the cost, as any expert
can readily point out many ways in which the enormous costs
of corporate management would be lessened.