interests of the country can be brought into close and harmonious relations with the railways.

On the other hand, chambers of commerce, boards of trade, business men's associations, agricultural societies, and analogous organizations have maintained departments, bureaus, secretaries, or standing committees on transportation, with the view of guarding and promoting the interests of their respective clienteles, in so far as these may be affected by railway transportation. Delegates and committees have held conferences with railway managers and other railway officials. Resolutions have been passed and laws proposed looking toward a change in the existing relations between the railways and these people. But such efforts have usually been one-sided, emanating either from the railways or from the shipping public, acting independently of one another, with perhaps little accurate knowledge of each other's points of view. There exists no regularly constituted middle ground on which the two parties can meet and deliberate, on the basis of authentic facts, and arrive at conclusions just and satisfactory to both and in accordance with the needs of the whole population, viewed in the broadest possible light.

Having seen that both the railways and the public have been feeling for each other, but that an uncovered suture still remains between them, the writer ventures to suggest a plan which may at least serve as a point of departure for the discus

sion of the wide and momentous questions involved, and possibly the plan may embody elements capable of elaboration into permanent arrangements. It should be understood, however, and this the writer desires expressly to emphasize, that this plan is suggestive only, that it is not given with dogmatic assertions as to its practicability, nor with the inference that it is complete and perpetual. Many conferences will have to be held, numerous hearings given, much deliberation engaged in, and a multitude of facts considered before a final working-plan can be adopted. The interests involved are so enormous, and the possibilities of a conflict so great, that nothing but a large, tolerant, and analytically accurate view can meet the situation.

The leading features of the plan here suggested are the following: The establishment by law of a system of state and interstate councils, having advisory power only, and representing all the various interests of the entire population as far as practicable. State councils might be organized in connection with state railway commissions, where these exist, or independently in those states which have no commissions. The size of state councils might vary with railway mileage, and the number and importance of the existing commercial and agricultural organizations. Both the elective and the appointive principles might be applied, the former to insure representation and the latter to secure expert knowledge and specialized efficiency.

The proportion of appointive to elective members might be made to vary whenever adequate reasons for such variation are properly presented to the Secretary of Commerce or other higher official, although at least three-fourths of the aggregate membership should perhaps be made elective. The governors of the respective states naturally suggest themselves as proper officers to exercise the appointing power with respect to state councils, and the President of the United States, through the Secretary of Commerce and Labor for interstate councils. The elective members should represent, in addition to persons representing the railways, all the various state organizations which meet prescribed requirements existing within that state, and which have primarily intrastate significance. Among these societies may be mentioned boards of trade, chambers of commerce, exchanges, business men's associations, associations of lumbermen, grocers, butchers, foundrymen, all the various manufacturers, dairymen, fruit-growers, agricultural societies, etc. The members to be appointed by the governor might be selected partly with the view of equalizing the representation of different interests. No paid officials would be necessary, with the possible exception of a permanent secretary, who could be attached to the office of the railway commission or some other high administrative officer. It would not even be necessary to pay the expenses of the council out of the public treasury, for a small tax on the organizations represented,

which their interests could doubtless well afford to pay, would be sufficient to defray the expenses of the representative. Certainly no salaries or per diem rates ought to be paid out of public funds during the formative period of the councils. If future development should demonstrate the desirability of payment to members, the law could be modified to meet the situation. Periodical meetings should be provided for, perhaps quarterly, and the interval of time between the meeting of state and interstate councils should be sufficiently long to enable the latter to review thoroughly the proceedings and recommendations of the former. All meetings should be public and the proceedings printed.

The territorial basis of interstate councils is not so easily defined, because of the different things. which may be regarded as fundamental in such a division of the area of the United States. The Interstate Commerce Commission has adhered to its original classification of railways into ten groups, based upon topographical considerations, density of population, nature of industrial life, and competitive conditions, although, in regard to the last, the Commission expressed itself as unable to discover system in railway competition at the time the classification was made. To organize one interstate council for each of these ten groups would make the higher councils too numerous, and, under present conditions, it would hardly bring together representatives of those

roads which belong together from the point of view of ownership and of rivalry in the same productive areas. A second possibility is the organization of an interstate council for each of the systems of railways, among which a community of interests has been established. But this, too, would involve ten or a dozen councils and an administrative separation of railways which belong together. The third, and what appears to be the most feasible plan, is that of accepting the present territorial limits of the dominating freight classifications and organizing an interstate council within each of them, with the possible division of the territory west of the Mississippi. This would make three interstate councils: one north of the Ohio and Potomac rivers and east of the Mississippi; the second south of the Ohio and Potomac rivers and east of the Mississippi; and the third for the territory west of the Mississippi. The distribution and election or appointment of members should be governed by the same principles as those which have been suggested for state councils. Each of the great railway systems should have representatives, perhaps on a mileage basis. The great national associations, such as the millers', builders', druggists', grocers', liquor-dealers', etc., might be requested to send a representative to some one of the three interstate councils; and, finally, the state councils lying within any one of these interstate divisions should elect representatives