Political reform in Wisconsin; a historical review of the subjects of primary election, taxation, and railway regulation

TSS

CHornrU Muterailjj ICtbrarg

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE

SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND

THE GIFT OF

1891

jM^rM. Z%

9306

iate shows when this volume was taken.

. To renew this book copy thf; call No. and give to
the Ubrari£in.

HOME USE RULES

m^.s-m4-t-r-Y

l!???IS

m^^_.

All Books subject to Recall

All borfowers must regis-
ter in the library to borrow
books fdr home usti,
-- ^All books must be re-
turned at end of college
year for inspection and
repairs.

Limited books must be re-
turned within the four week
limjt and \not renewed.

Sti;t^entS/must return all
books before leavingjtown.
Officers should arrange for
the return of Jaooks' wanted
during their .absence frotti
town.

Volumes of perigdicals
and of pamphlets are held
in t}i6 library as much ^ as
possible. For special pur-
poses they are given out for
a limited time.

Borrowers should not use
their library privileges for
the. benefit of other persons.

Books of special, value
and, gift books, wh!en the
giver wishes it, are not
allowed to circulate. ■

pleaders are asked. tfO re-
port all cases of books
niarked or mutilated.

Do not deface books by marks and writing.

cornel. U^jverslty Library
JK6025 1910 .P55

.. Mil

Cornell University
Library

The original of tiiis book is in
tine Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030493914

m

POLITICAL
REFORM

•IN -

WISCONSIN

i#

tr^..^

^^m.

A. HISTORICAL
RHVIEMT OK
PRIMARY ELECTION,
TAXATIONand RAILWAY
REGULATION.

EX. PHILIPP

POLITICAL
REFORM IN
WISCONSIN

A HISTORICAL REVIEW
OF THE SUBJECTS OF

Primary Election,
Taxation and
Railway Regulation

BY

Emanuel L. Philipp

ASSISTED BT

Edgar T. Wheelock

' For Sale at and Trade Supplied by

C. N. CASPAR CO.
BOOK EMPORIUM

454 EAST WATER ST.

One Door South of St. Charles Hotel

MILWAUKEE, - WISCONSIN

ISib

FOREWORD

At no period in the history of our state has there been so much
political agitation as has made the last ten years memorable, and at
no time, not excepting the stormy years immediately preceding
and during'the civil war, has so much bitterness been injected into
our politics. To the student of history there is something strange
and unaccountable in the story of recent political events in Wiscon-
sin. It is an unusual thing to see a community change its public
policy, the habits of a lifetime, and its leaders, j,lmost in a breath ;
it is an unusual thing also to see a state that alvrays has been re-
garded as one of the most conservative in the union suddenly, as
if by the influence of some magic power, transformed iuto one of
the most advanced, impatient, not to say intemperate "reform"
states in the entire sisterhood.

While it may be unduly dignifying the change in the political
policy effected in Wisconsin at the beginning of the present decade
to call it a bloodless revolution, it certainly was more than a mere
change of administration, a substitution of one set of state officers
for another of the same party. And it came suddenly, almost
without warning. Whatever mutterings of discontent previously
had been heard had all disappeared. While a peaceful calm rested
upon the state following a campaign in which there had been pro-
testations of harmony and good will on all sides; at a time when
citizens were looking forward to real progress under the beneficent
influences of peace and prosperity, the alarm was suddenly sounded,
signal fires were set blazing upon the hill tops, the dogs of war were
loosed and the clans were called out in battle array. For what ?

'The history of the nations of the world records many revolu-
tionary movements in the past, but usually there was a satisfactory
and sufficient cause for them. It is found that 'people are, as a
rule, slow to rebel against the constituted authorities without some
well defined and clearly understood reason. They may protest
against the enforcement of oppressive laws ; they may revolt against
corruption in public office ; they may refuse to be unjustly taxed ; or
there may be other sins of omission or commission on the part of
the public servants or rulers, as the case may be, which have be-
come intolerable and which explain the citizens' determination to
• have a political house-cleaning for the general public good.

But that was not the case in Wisconsin. The student of history
will look in vain in the records of this, state for proof of corruption
in public office, for evidence of public scandals of any character wor-
thy of consideration. He will find no statutes that were oppressive ;
he will find no indications of extravagance or waste of public re-
sources by state officials ; he will not find statistics to prove that the
people were overburdened by taxation for the support of the state

4 FORBWOBD.

administration, for there had been but one state tax for general
purposes for nearly twenty years.

A careful and unprejudiced investigation of the facts of history
leads inevitably to the conclusion that there was no public necessity
for the political disturbance that accompanied the change of ad-
ministration in January, 1901. The political issues fought out in
this state and which engendered so much bitterness, so much intem-
perate discussion, so much hatred and malice, did not involve any
vital principles of government that must be conserved. The contest
was merely a struggle for leadership and political power. The "is-
sues" were the means whereby their inventors hoped to attain their
ends. They succeeded.

This assertion is sufBciently justified by the experiences of the
state under the laws enacted for the reformation of our statutes dur-
ing the so-called "progressive" period. Certain laws have been
amended and other laws have been replaced by statutes radically
differing from the originals. The promises to make changes in
the laws have been kept to the letter. But the benefits that were
to be derived; the advantages that would, it was promised, follow
the enactment of these "progressive" measures as a necessary and
logical effect following a given cause, have not materialized.

The publication of the outline of recent historical events con-
tained in the following pages is not designed to revive factional
disputes, which were too bitter to be pleasant, or to kindle anew
the fires of discord. But it is believed the people of the state are
now in a condition of mental repose that will enable them to run
over again the data relating to that period without danger to them-
selves or their neighbors. By now printing the truth about certain
legislation, its origin, the means employed to secure its enactment,
and the effect of the laws in operation, citizens will be enabled to
weigh the results. of the contest in which they have engaged and
learn for themselves whether the "reform" secured has been worth
what it cost.

Did it pay to drive from public life prominent servants who
had won distinction for themselves and their state?

Did it pay to embitter neighbor against neighbor, brother against
brother, and friend against friend for the sake of enacting the laws
we now have that would not have been passed in the ordinary
course of events without a fight?

In preparing this historical review it has been the intention to
cover the three important subjects of legislation as fully as was
practicable in their proper order. The first subject treated is the
primary election law. To the end that the progress made prior to
the presentation of the bill abolishing all caucuses and conventions
may be understood, the evolutionary movement that led up to the
enactment of the Milwaukee primary law and the subsequent exten-
sion of that law to the entire state has been traced step by step. The

FOBEWOED. 5

effect of the direct primary law in operation has been analyzed, and
the fruitless attempt to strengthen a law that has sorely disap-
pointed its most sincere friends and one that has been repudiated
on more than one occasion by its authors and principal champions,
are considered.

Following the primary election legislation is a review of the
history of taxation legislation which resulted in the creation of the
state tax commission, the enactment of important taxation laws
and the general reform, so far as was possible in the circumstances,
of the taxation system. Great progress has been made in this
field of political activity — so much will be shown beyond question.
But that progress has not been made on the public platform, at the
hustings, or in the columns of the newspapers. The men who are
entitled to credit for a greater part of the advance made along tax
reform lines are the men who have, with painstaking care, patient
effort, deep study and an unselfish devotion to the cause in which
they were enlisted, accomplished results. These men have left
theii" marks indelibly on the pages of Wisconsin's history.

The third and last part of the review is devoted to the events
which led up to the enactment of laws for the regulation of trans-
portation companies. There is no disposition on the part of the
writer of this history to fly to the defense of the transportation
companies. This is a history — ^not an apology or a defense. But
there has been so much matter printed about the regulation of cor-
porations ; there have been so many extravagant statements concern-
ing public benefits that would be derived from the enactment of
laws designed to place the corporations under a more strict super-
vision by public officers; there have been so many unjust and
uncalled for charges laid at the door of public men who did not
agree with the radical "progressives" as to the exact form railroad
legislation should take; and there have been so many and such
extravagant claims of credit supposed to be due for the passage
of the laws now on the statute books, it is but just and right to all
parties that the facts should be given to the public.

As has been said, this history is not the outgrowth' of a desire
to revive past disputes. The controversy, is ended. The-citizens
of Wisconsin have now settled down to await the reward of their
labors. They have paid the price — will the progressive leaders
"deliver the goods?" Have they delivered the goods? If not,
why not? There has been time for the primary election law to
scatter its blessings over the state: has it done so? There has
been ample time for the new taxation system to reduce the taxes
of those who were overburdened : have taxes anywhere been reduced ?
There has been ample time to materialize all or most of the benefits
promised as the result of railroad rate regulation by the state : can
you find those benefits in your business? These are some of the
questions that will be discussed in this review.

PART ONE.

THE EVOLUTION AND KEVOLUTION OP THE PRIMARY.

CHAPTER I.
The Direct Pkimaky.

The direct primary principle is advocated by citizens who be-
lieve in sticking as close to the pure democratic form of government
as is possible. They believe the citizen should never delegate his
rights and powers as a voter to another when it is possible for him
to perform his duties and exercise his privileges himself. They
believe the right to vote for candidates for office necessarily carries
with it the right to assist in nominating those candidates ; that the
first step in the exercise of the elective franchise is as important as
the second; that the right to cast the first ballot in making a direct
choice at the primary is as sacred as the right to cast the second
ballot on election day.

The motives of the men who, during the last thirty years, have
publicly advocated primary election reforms in the several states
should not be called in question. In the main these progressives,
as they like to be called, have been sincere and unselfish in their
devotion to a movement believed by them to be designed to purify
politics, to improve the personnel of the office holding class, to
dethrone the political boss and put his "gang" out of business, and
to encourage the better element of the citizenry to actively partici-
pate in primaries and elections. Many of the advocates of the
movement have been members of that "better element" about which
so much has been said and written during the discussions that have
attended the progress along reform lines. With certain glaring
exceptions, they have been men in whom the outward and visible
sign of an inward office hunger was not too painfully conspicuous.
They simply wanted to arrange the nominating machinery so that
men of their own kind would be encouraged to take an active part in
politics.

Years ago it was argued in the public press and periodicals that
good people did not attend mass caucuses because they were con-
vinced the results of those meetings always were determined in
advance; that the election of delegates to conventions was "fixed
up by some job or ring influence." Also, it was asserted that the
better element would not attend political caucuses in the evening or

8 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

at any hour "at the risk of encountering a crowd, or being hustled
or jostled by intoxicated men." That there was foundation in
fact for the statements discrediting the mass caucus in large cities
'does not require argument. Men who know to what extent the
hoodlum element carried their excesses at the primaries — and the
elections as well — in metropolitan cities and congested districts,
will not make excuses for the abuses complained of or attempt to
palliate them.

The result was that the complaints, persistently but not too
clamorously made at first, had a tendency to prick the law makers
and party leaders to activity and tentative experiments in primary
reforms were. inaugurated. This was a wholesome movement and
it did not call for an acrimonious controversy, as politicians as well
as private citizens lent their aid to the effort to remove the defects
complained of by judiciously treating the cause. As a- matter of
fact, from the first voluntary changes in the method of conducting
caucuses made by party leaders in Wisconsin before any law on the
subject had been enacted, down to the time of the violent outbreak
of controversy in 1901, there was little if any public interest mani-
fested in the movement. Yet noteworthy progress was made in the
betterment of conditions under which the primaries were held.

In California the primary election idea was recognized by law
as early as 1866, and in^l873 that recognition was formally incor-
porated into the codes. Any party or association of electors in any
political subdivision of the state was authorized by law to hold a
primary election for the nomination of local candidates and the
election of delegates to represent them in conventions called for
larger districts in which the voters at the primary were entitled to
participate. Other states . followed in the footsteps of California.
Early in the last quarter of the nineteenth century the city of
Baltimore regularly elected its municipal officers from candidates.
nominated by direct vote of the people of that city without the
intervention of party conventions. In Baltimore it was reported
that the experiment was eminently satisfactory in its results. At a
meeting of the Young Men's Democratic club of New York, held
in that city in December, 1881, it was asserted of the Baltimore pri- ■
maries that:

"There the primary votes directly for the candidate and the polls
are open all day. The result has been the extirpation of the political
bosses and an extraordinarily full vote. In 1876, when all the municipal
offices were to be filled, 6,200 democrats out of 7,500 registered voted on
the nominations at the polls at the primaries. If we could obtain any-
thing approaching to the same proportion of the party vote on nomina-
tions of both sides in this city, what a gain it would be!"

On the other hand, the experiment in California was not so
satisfactory. A citizen of San Francisco complains, in a letter to
the Nation Magazine of January 28, 1882, that, while the direct
vote primary, when held in the rural districts, uniformly elected a

TpE Evolution and Revolution of the Peimaby. 9

superior class of delegates and nominated good men for office, the
result of such elections in the city was that invariably dissensions
followed and dissatisfaction was manifested.

Subsequent trials of the primary election plan were made in
Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and other states.
In each case, however, the option was given to the party managers
to call a primary or to nominate by. the old caucus and convention
plan. It will be noticed that practically all the early experiinents
with the plan of nominating candidates by direct vote of the mem-
bers of the party were made in what may he called one party
states, and it was the dominant party that made use of the primary
election to nominate its candidates. The minority party in each
of the states mentioned had no use for restraints imposed by a
primary law. They had no contests for nominations. Their
principle trouble was in persuading citizens to accept nominations
at their hands to be followed by certain failure of election without
any attending glory to take the poison from the sting of defeat or to
repay them for the loss of time and, the expense incidental to the
campaign.

AH this time experience, growth, development, were doing their
work and prominent men who were known as practical politicians,
as well as public spirited private citizens, were becoming more and
more interested in a movement to devise a workable plan for regu-
lating the primaries. It may be said all parties and all classes of
citizens contributed to some extent toward the solution of the prob-
lem, for the democrats in strong democratic states and cities, and
republicans in sections where they were in control by reason of their
majorities, made changes in the primaries, in many cases without
a statutory urge, because they believed the matters pertaining to
party government should be left" to the control of party members.
In other cases, when it was found that the authority of law would
aid the movement, statutes were enacted giving to party committees
a legal status, defining their duties and making provisions for the
government of primaries. The progress made was purely evolu-
tionary in its character and the changes were so natural and logical,
following in one another's footsteps in so orderly a manner, they did
not cause surprise or excite bitter contentions,

10 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE II.
The Keogh, Law of 1891.

The first attempt in Wisconsin to regulate primaries by law was
the enactment of what was known as the Keogh law, chapter 439,
laws of 1891. This act applied .to Milwaukee county only, and was
placed in the statute books through the efforts of the Milwaukee
delegation in the legislature. No platform pledges had been made
to reform the primaries; no campaign had been conducted in the
interests of such reform ; no public demand made through the news-
papers had furnished the inspiration or 'pointed the way; no meet-
ings were held; no bands were employed to please or torture the
public ear, as the case might be; no impassioned orators appealed
to the electorate to rise in its might and hurl from places of power
and trust the faithless caucus manipulators. The impossibility of
continuing to do party business in an orderly manner at mass
caucuses in congested municipal wards had become apparent, and
the practice already had been partially abandoned. In a quiet way,
therefore, the representatives of Milwaukee voters attempted to
crystallize into a concrete plan the nebulous ideas that had
ruled in the government of the primaries for a number of years.

In country districts, villages and small cities the mass caucus
had not fallen altogether iato disrepute at that time. Contests
there had been, it is true, and some sharp ones at that, but as a
rule township and ward officers nominated and delegates elected in
rural primaries and the smaller municipalities were acknowledged
to fairly represent a majority of the parties holding the caucuses.
In some sections of the state, like the mining and lumbering regions
of the north, complaint was made that at times caucuses were
packed and ruled by mob law, and contests in conventions based on
charges of that character were not unknown. But these instances
were the exception, not the rule.

On the other hand, party managers and public spirited citizens
had learned that the members of the parties in a thickly settled ward
could not meet in mass caucuses and by a viva voce vote give ex-
pression to their choice with any assurance that the will of the legal
majority would prevail. Where lines were sharply drawn between
conflicting interests it frequently occurred that one or the other
side would gain an unfair advantage by introducing nonresident
strikers and heelers, members of other parties, toughs and hood-
lums, to the disgust of respectable citizens who would thereby be
driven away from the caucuses. In seeking a remedy for this con-
dition, the party leaders and committeemen already had adopted a
rule in many instances that party primaries were to be held open
for at least an hour and voting was to be done by ballot. This was
a step in the right direction, but it did not go far enough,

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primary. 11

The Keogh bill, No. 136A, was introduced by that veteran demo-
cratic legislator, Edward Keogh of Milwaukee, who consented to
allow the influence of his name to be used to the advantage of the
measure, the democratic party having secured an overwhelming
majority at the memorable "Bennett law election" the previous fall.
Mr. Keogh had served one term in the state senate and was, at
the time this bill was introduced, representing his district in the
assembly for the twelfth time. He made it thirteen before he re-
tired permanently to private life. But while he consented to father
the bill, his age and the dignity of his position as the oldest member
were such that he left to the younger members of the delegation the
real work incidental to the passage of the measure. As it. hap-
pened, Michael Kruszka, then in his first term, full of hard work,
enthusiasm, and a desire to do something worth while, became the
dry nurse of the measure.

The bill was first referred to the judiciary committee, made up
of six democrats and three republicans. The democrats were John
Winans of Eock county, chairman; James D. Watson, Fond du Lac;
Joshua E. Dodge, Eacine ; Neal Brown, Marathon ; Conrad Krez and
H. J. Desmond, Milwaukee. The republicans were Orrin T. Wil-
liams, Milwaukee; L. H. Mead, Washburn, Charles F. Osborn, La-
fayette and Green.

This committee failed to discover any constitutional obstacles
to the passage of the bill but declined to assume responsibility for
it and asked that it be referred to the Milwaukee delegation, which
was done. Milwaukee was represented that year by the following
members of the lower house :

First district, Humphrey J. Desmond, D.

Second district, William J. Friebrantz, E.

Third district, Edward Keogh, D.

Fourth district, Orrin T. Williams, E.

Fifth District, Conrad Krez, D.

Sixth district, William Pierron, E.

Seventh district, Charles H. Anson, E.

Eighth district, Henry Schuetz, D.

Ninth district, Philip Schmitz, Jr., D.

Tenth district, John Horn, D.

Eleventh district, Ambrose McGuigan, D.

Twelfth district, Michael Kruszka, D.

After deliberating on the measure from February 27 until
April 16, this delegation finally presented a report, Mr. Williams
dissenting, recommending certain amendments and the passage of
the bill when amended. As it applied only to Milwaukee county
the delegation was a determining factor in the situation and the
bill was amended as suggested and passed. Action in the senate was
e-xpedited by the Milwaukee members of that body, John J. Kempf
and Paul Bechtner, republicans, and Herman Kroeger and Chris-

12 Political Refoem in Wisconsin.

tion Koenitzer, democrats, who gave the measure their unqualified
indorsement. The bill was passed, signed by Gov. George W. Peek,
also a Milwaukee man, and became a law by .publication.

This statute illustrates, better than columns of newspaper arti-
cles could have done, the uninformed condition of public sentiment
at the time it was passed and the stage to which the primary reform
idea had advanced. The law prescribed how a citizen was to pro-
ceed ui securing a "nomination to any office to be voted for at
the election at which he desired to be a candidate," and explained
how he might have his name printed on the official primary ballot,
which was to be provided by the party committees. He was re-
quired to file with the county clerk "a written notice specifying his
name, age, residence, giving street and number if possible, occupa-
tion, nationality, and the office to which he desires to be nominated,
which such notice shall be indorsed by at least ten qualified electors
and freeholders of the ward or township in which he resides-; and
any such notice not so indorsed shall not be received or filed by such
county clerk." Caucuses were to be held on the same day for each
party and be kept open for a stated period.

On the face of this law a direct vote was required for all candi-
dates for city and county offices in Milwaukee county. Conventions
'and delegates were not mentioned in the law or given legal recogni-
tion in any manner. While they were not specifically abolished or
forbidden in terms, no other reading can be given the Keogh law
except that it required a nomination by direct vote of every candi-
date in the country.

But the thought of abolishing conventions had doubtless not
entered the minds of the men who were responsible for the enact-
ment of this statute. At all events, the only effect of its operation
was to cause delegates to conventions to be classed as officers and
their names were placed on the official primary baUots and their
elections held under the conditions that obtained in the selection
of ward and township, officers. It did not occur to the members
of the legislature or the people of Milwaukee county that the Keogh
law had abolished caucuses and conventions and substituted there-
for a sweeping primary election. But such was the case,
nevertheless.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Peimaby. la

CHAPTEK III.
The Development of the Milwaukee Primary Law.

All experience teaches that first attempts at legislation in a
new field, where precedents are wanting and the framers of the
proposed statute have only their desire to improve conditions and
their native wit to guide them, usually fall far short of perfection.
There have been few men in the history of the race who could draft
a legislative act that would answer the purpose desired without sub-
sequent changes. Even when the matter under consideration is one
that has been mulled over many times before, it is the rule that
many an i must be dotted and many a t crossed before the last
word is said on the subject.
' This was the case with the Keogh law. It was a crude effort at
best, and the result of its trial was that the first bill introduced
m the assembly in 1893 was for its repeal. This bill was No. lA,
'and it was speedily passed and became chapter 7, laws of 1893.

-But the reform effort did not stop here. Milwaukee political
leaders and business men were not satisfied to go back to the old
system. A new bill was introduced in the senate by Michael
Kruszka, who had been promoted to that body by his constituents.
This bill was numbered 144S, and upon its passage and publication
it became chapter 249, laws of 1893, and was called the Kruszka
law. Gov. George W. Peck's name appears on the original bill on
file in Madison.

In this statute, which, like its predecessor, applied only to Mil-
waukee county, some progress was attained and conventions and
delegates were specifically recognized. Provision was made for the
organization of township, ward and county committees; for the
holding of township and ward caucuses at which local officers were
to be nominated and delegates elected to district, city and county
conventions; primaries were to be conducted like elections, to be
in charge of officers appointed by the committees, and votes were
to be canvassed and returns made as in the case of regular elections.
Only qualified electors were permitted to participate in these
caucuses and penalties were prescribed for all fraudulent voting
or attempts to commit fraud.

This bill was also referred to the Milwaukee delegation, wMch
assumed all responsibility for it, and a new law thus, came into
being and was given a trial in the subsequent campaigns.

When the time came to test the law of 1893 the secretary of
the Milwaukee republican county committee. Dr. W. A. Pricke,
who was a stickler for order and method and a believer in perfect
party organization, found that his work was cut out for him if
he was to comply with all its provisions. Not having been built
up and fitted together piece by piece, as the result of mature experi-

14 PoLiTicAi, Reform in Wisconsin.

ence and educated statecraft, it was found that the act was equally
as valuable as an indication of what should be done and what
avoided in framing a new law as it was as a statute for the regula-
tion of the primaries. The republicans of Milwaukee county had,
as the result of an attempt to comply with the Keogh law of 1891,
completed a county organization that was the most perfect of any
that had been in existence up to that time. In 1893 the committee
had reorganized under the Kruszka law and was in still better
shape. Now, in order to comply with the new law as far as possible,
forms and blanks were prepared by the secretary and an effort
made to follow out in detail every provision made for the govern-
ment of the primaries. This was found to be a difficult problem
and it never was satisfactorily solved.-

But the experience gained at the spring election in 1894 was
worth all the trouble and money it cost, as it enabled the committee
to adopt a set of regulations for use at the primaries in the fall of
that year that proved to be of value when the time came to frame
a third experimental law in the winter of 1895.

The history of bill number 329S, 1895, is an interesting one.
The republican party had once more elected a majority of the two
houses of the legislature and Gov. William H. Upham presided in
the executive chamber. Senator Kruszka, still in the senate and
still interested in caucus reforms, felt that it would be better to
have the new bill drawn by him introduced by a. member of the
dominant party. In this emergency Senator Thomas B. Mills of
Superior was appealed to for help and he introduced the measure
and championed it, although it still remained a local Milwaukee
bill. It was referred to the committee on privileges and elections
on Feb. 13 and slumbered in the committee box until April 4.

Meanwhile there had been many conferences on the subject be-
tween interested parties, as others besides the original promoters
of the movement had become interested. Dr. Fricke, in particular,
representing the Milwaukee county republican committee, was
active in these conferences. The forms and blanks used at the
spring caucuses of the republican party and the carefully prepared
regulations drawn up for use in the autumn of that year were
brought into the conferences. "The result was a substitute bill that
more nearly attained the object sought than any previous effort had
done, as it represented the best thought of leading men in and out
of politics in the state at that time. This substitute was reported
by the committee, passed both houses, was signed by Gov. Upham,
and became chapter 288, laws of 1895.

By this act caucuses were defined and directions given for hold-
ing all such meetings under the provisions of this statute ; all other
gatherings for the purpose of nominating candidates for office or
electing delegates to conventions were declared illegal and forbidden.
Only qualified electors of the party holding the caucus were entitled

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primaey. 15

to vote, and punishment was prescribed for all who voted or at-
tempted to vote unlawfully. The mode of electing county commit-
teemen was prescribed and the duties of those bodies were defined.
Caucuses were to be held in regular election booths to be kept open
in city wards from 4 to 9 o'clock p. m., and in towns and villages
from 3 to 6 o'clock p. m. County committees were to appoint
annually on the first of February three electors in each ward,
township, and village, to act as inspectors. Caucuses were not to
be held more than two days before the conventions at which the
delegates to be elected were to serve. All local officers were to
be nominated by a direct vote by ballot at the caucuses and votes
were to be canvassed and returns made as at elections. The penal
statutes applying to all elections were made a part of the law.

One of the important features of this act was the provision
made for placing candidates before the primary, a matter that has
caused considerable controversy since the primary law now in force
went into effect. The expense incidental to the circulation of nomi-
nating papers and much of the labor and cost of ante-primary cam-
paigns were avoided by holding a preliminary meeting at which
names were suggested to be voted for at the regular primary. These
preliminary meetings were called by the county committee and were
held four days before the date set for the caucus. The meetings
were regularly Called to order by the local inspectors, a clerk was
elected, and any qualified elector could be placed in nomination by
the mere suggestion of his name. The clerk of the meeting made
a record of the names suggested in the order in which they were
presented and certified the list to the county committee, which body
prepared tickets for the primaries. No other ticket could be used at
the caucuses and the voter was required to mark out all the names
of candidates for whom he did not want to vote. The board of
registration was directed to furnish a list of registered voters to all
inspectors of primaries, and voters whose names did not appear on
those lists were required to swear in their votes.

As this law applied also to Milwaukee county only, the, support
that secured its enactment came mainly from that county. By this
time, however, there were leaders in other sections of the state who
were becoming interested in the movement. They had watched de-
velopments in the Milwaukee primaries and were preparing to take
steps to enlarge the scope of any workable law that gave promise
of assuring clean primaries and a full and free expression of the
will of a majority of the party voters at such meetings. The mem-
bers of the Milwaukee delegation in the legislature in 1895 were :
Senators James C. OflBcer, William H. Austin and Charles T.
Fisher, republicans; Oscar Altpeter and Michael Kruszka, demo-
crats. In the assembly :

First district— H. S. Dodge (E).

Second district— George B. Mahoney (D).

16 Political Refokm in Wisconsin.

Third district— G. J. Jeske (R).

Fourth district — Frank Anson (E).

Fifth district— Albert Waller (R).

Sixth district — R.- Klabunde (E).

Seventh district — Edward C. Notbohm (R).

Eighth district— E. E. Stillman (R).

Ninth district— C. Winter (E).

Tenth district — Theodore Prochnow (E).

Eleventh district — Chris. Paulus (E).

Twelfth district — Andrew Bonsel (D).

Thirteenth district— B. A. Eaton (E).

Fourteenth district— E. D. Hoyt (R).

When the legislature of 1897 met at Madison the people of Mil-
waukee county had made two trials of the new primary law and
they were pleased with it. Not only were the citizens of the
metropolis of the state, where the greatest need of primary regula-
tion had been felt, content to continue working under -the new
system, but leading men of other sections who had taken occasion
to observe the operations of the plan were convinced that it was a
substantial, workable reform, and were in favor of extending the
advantages-it afforded to other cities.

For the reasons given a new bill was prepared and introduced,
making such minor 'changes in the statute as experience dictated
and providing for extending it to "all caucuses and meetings of
political parties held for the purpose of nominating candidates, or
choosing delegates to assemble in convention to nominate any
person for public office, to be voted for at any general or municipal
election held in all the cities in this state, except as hereinafter
provided." The exception mentioned was placed at the end of the"
first section and reads as follows:

"The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to municipal elections
held in cities of the third and fourth class until such cities have adopted
the same, as provided in section 11 of this act."

Section 11 explained how the question of the adoption of the
plan for making nominations by ballot at primaries was to be sub-
mitted to a popular vote in cities of the third and fourth class.

The principal amendments made in 1897 to the law as it then
existed, and as it applied to Milwaukee county were: (a) The
hours during which the caucuses were to be kept open in city wards
were from 13 m. to 8 p. m. (b) At preliminary meetings the
names of persons suggested as candidates to be voted for at the
primaries were to be written on slips of paper and deposited in a
box. After nominations had closed, the names were to be with-
drawn from the box and placed on a list by the secretary in the
order in which they were drawn. In that order they were to be
printed on the official ballots.

This measure, which was senate bill No. 58, was introduced by

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primary. 1,7

Senator Thomas B. Mills of Superior, and met with little or no
opposition in either house, so unanimous was the sentiment in favor
of the effort then being made to find a way by which the initial, or
fundamental, meetings of pasty members could be made as free
from objectionable features as possible, thereby encouraging a full
attendance a,nd an untrammeled expression of opinion in the selec-
tion of party candidates.

Up to this time the men who subsequently became known as
primary election reformers had taken no hand in the work of fram-
ing the laws to better conditions. The movement had been an
evolutionary one, pure and simple, and a majority of the leaders
whose pushful energy and persistent determination hai carried it
to its then stage of development would not be called politicians, if
a strict classification were to be attempted. Many who aided them
were plain business men who had been sent to the legislature, not
because they were reformers, but because they were believed to be
men whose brains were capable of doing good, plain thinking. Also,
there were business and professional men who held no official posi-
tions who gave the movement their moral support.

The final step in the primary evolutionary movement was the
passage of assembly bill N"o. 126, introduced by Louis A. Lange,
a Fond du Lac democratic newspaper publisher, which was approved
by Gov. Edward Scofield May 3, 1899, and became chapter 341 of
the laws of that year. . Up to this point there had been steady, sub-
stantial progress from year to year, progress dictated by sound
judgment and marked by experiments in every campaign. It was
a far cry from the Keogh law of 1891 to the Lange bill of 1899.
Important were the changes that had been made, but the movement
had been evolutionary in its character from beginning to end.

The law of 1899 extended the operation of the Milwaukee law
to the entire state so far as it was believed to be wise at the time.
It was made to apply, in a modified form, to all towns, cities and
villages. It was essentially an experiment, the purpose being to
discover how a law, originally framed to meet the demands of
a city where congested wards were to be found and where the voting
population of any ward was as numerous as that of an ordinary city
in the interior of the state, would work in the rural districts and
villages. It had been successfully tried in many of the cities of the
second, third and fourth class! The question was, would the rural
communities take kindly to it and would it prove beneficial in such
places ?

No reasonable man can doubt for an instant that, had this
movement been permitted to continue, there would have been steady
but gradual improvement in the primary laws until approximate
perfection would have been attained in statutes that could be made
to work smoothly and justly, because they would have been based
on ripe experience — as were tbe statutes already in force, But

18 Political Refohm in Wisconsin.

this was not to be. Already the revolutionary movement had been
foreshadowed by the introduction of a sweeping direct primary elec-
tion bill in 1897 by Assemblyman William T. Lewis of Racine, in
public addresses by Eobert M. La Pollette, a tentative bill prepared
for publication and publicly circulated by Hon. L. J. Nash of Mani-
towoc, and a bill introduced in the assembly by Gen. George E.
Bryant in 1899 as a suggestion of what Mr. La Pollette then ad-
vocated. In other states the sentiment in favor of a more radical
reform measure was spreading. Meetings of reformers were held,
states were falling into line, the Outlook Magazine, edited then as
now by the Eev. Lyman Abbott, was conducting an energetic cam-
paign, and the demand was becoming general that all conventions
for the nomination of candidates for public office be abolished by
law. California, Oregon, Minnesota, and Illinois had each adopted
or were about to adopt the direct primary system. There was a
strong sentiment in New York in favor of the same plan and in
other states the campaign was progressing satisfactorily — from the
viewpoint of the reformers.

No specific complaints have ever been registered against the
law of 1899. Under that law Eobert M. La Follette was nominated
for governor of Wisconsin by the republican party in 1900. The
story of the revolution that followed is entitled to treatment by
itself.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimaby. 19

CHAPTER IV.

How THE Direct Primary Idea Was Born, Grew, and Flour-
ished IN Wisconsin.

There is much to be regretted by the people of Wisconsin in the
history made during the bitter factional feud that broke out in the
winter of 1901 in Madison. As is always the case when two wings
of a political party engage in a heated controversy in which the per-
sonal element plays a conspicuous part, neither side was entirely
blameless in this instance. There were men in both factions who
at heart were actuated by the highest motives, whose personal integ-
rity should not be questioned, but whose acts on occasions were col-
ored to some extent by their surroundings and associations. Sincere
men -who tried to do their duty were misunderstood and misjudged
by others, equally sincere, who in their turn were misunderstood and
misjudged. The trouble at Madison was that the legislative and
executive wires were crossed and the wholesome currents of reason
and wisdom were short circuited.

The consequence was that the advancement the people had a
right to expect from that and succeeding legislatures was made im-
possible. Reforms that had been well started on the road to ultimate
success were side tracked indefinitely. Measures that required the
wisest counsel of all members of the legislature to make them w6rk-
able and effective for good became the subjects of acrimonious de-
bate and the best results were not attained. Undue weight fre-
quently was given to matters of relatively trifling importance; fac-
tional advantage was sought on occasions by perniciously active
partisans at the sacrifice of the best interests of the state, and the
more conservative members of both parties to the controversy were
at times swept into the heat of battle against their better judgment,
which was held in abeyance for the time being.

It was not the proposition to reform the primaries that brought
about the unfortunate outbreak of hostilities beginning in 1901 and
continuing through successive campaigns. As has been shown, the
work of improving the primaries, begun in 1891, had progressed
steadily from that time through successive biennial sessions of the
•legislature down to the year 1899. The old mass caucus had served
its day and purpose and had been summarily deposited in that gulf
into which are dumped all worn out institutions that have outlived
their usefulness.

The first step toward the entire abolition of conventions as well
as caucuses in this state was made in 1897 by, the introduction of
bill No. 580A by Assemblyman William T. Lewis of Eacine, a man-
ufacturer and business man, not a professional politician. Mr.
Lewis was not the author of the 'Tlewis Primary Election bill," as
it was afterward called. When he came to Madison there were two

20 Political Reforai in Wisconsin.

subjects in which he was interested and for which he hoped to secure
a respectful hearing. One was convict labor, he being opposed to
allowing the inmates of the state prison to compete with free labor ;
the other was the direct nomination of all candidates for office by
the voters at primary elections.

Shortly after the opening of the legislature Mr. Lewis called
upon Mr. La FoUette, then a private citizen practicing law in Mad-
ison, having failed in his effort to secure the republican nomination
for governor the previous year. Mr. Lewis presented the two sub-
jects mentioned to Mr. La Follette, explained his understanding
of them, and asked La Follette to draw two bills to be presented to
the legislature covering those subjects. Mr. La Follette replied"
that he was so busy at that time that it would be impossible for him
to comply with the request, and declined to undertake the task.

Mr. Lewis then laid the matter before another Madison attorney
with better results," as he did secure a Bill relating to convict labor,
which he introduced. Some time later the attorney came to Mr.
Lewis with the draft of a primary bill, and that, too, was introduced
and became the Lewis primary election bill of 1897. It provided
for holding primaries on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in
September of each election year and.the nomination of all candidates
for public office by a direct vote of the party members. The pri-
maries of all parties were to be held at the same time and place, but
they were to be in fact separate primaries, as each party was to have
its own inspectors, ballots, and ballot boxes, and the voters were ex-
pected to state their preferences as to parties and to participate in
the nomination of the candidates of the party thus selected, and no
other. On April 8 this measure was indefinitely postponed on rec-
ommendation of the committee on privileges and elections, the com-
mittee that reported favorably on the Mills primary bill already
referred to.

The second bill to require nominations by a direct vote was intro-
duced in the legislature in 1899 by Gen. George E. Bryant, after-
ward chairman of the republican state central committee. This
-measure was almost identical in its provisions with the Lewis bill
and it met the same fate at the session that passed the Lange law
extending the scope of the Milwaukee law to the entire state in a
modified form.

In the absence of evidence to the contrary it is fair to presume
that the Lewis bill was Mr. La FoUette's first introduction to the
primary idea. Up to that time, although he frequently had ap-
peared as the champion of reforms of one kind of another, he had
never proposed the nomination of candidates by a direct vote. He
had been defeated in the convention of 1896, an eyenl calculated to
make him resentful and cause him to meditate revenge, but it was a
year after he had talked with Mr, .Lewis that he first gave public
expression to his wish to do away with conventions altogether. The

The Evolution and Kevolution of the Peimart. 2l

Lewis bill was introduced in the assembly on Feb. 10, 1897, and in
March, 1898, Mr. La Follette made his famous Ann Arbor speech
before the students of the University of Michigan, in which he took
an unequivocal stand in favor of the abolition of all caucuses and
conventions and the nomination of candidates for state, congres-
sional, legislative, judicial and local offices by a direct vote of the
electors, using the Australian ballot. He did not present an outline
of a measure to be adopted, but contented himself with proving to
his own satisfaction that official and corporate corruption, of which
he painted a lurid picture, could only be banished from our states
by the application in some practical form to be devised by legisla-
tures of the broad principle of direct nominations. This address
was printed in the Chicago Tribune at the time and caused consid-
erable comment. Also it was delivered before the students of the
University of Chicago and on every occasion where Mr. La Follette
could secure an audience.

The same year, Mr. La Follette became a candidate for the re-
publican nomination for governor a second time and once more he
was defeated in the state convention. The campaign was a warm
one and the attacks made on Gov. Scdfield by Mr. La Follette's par-
tisans were not calculated to induce the people of Wisconsin to trust
the fiery aspirant for gubernatorial honors and his partisans with
the government of the state.

The convention of delegates did, however, adopt a platform in
which appeared a plank that has since been interpreted to mean that
the primary election idea was popular and had been promised to the-
people of the state. The plank read as follows :

"Recognizing that the present caucus and convention law is not
free from defects, we favor such legislation as will secure to every
citizen the freest expression of his choice in the selection of candi-
dates."

The republican party, aided by democrats, had been endeavoring
for eight years to remedy the defects in the caucus and convention
system, and they were in a fair way to succeed.

TBut it must be aclmowledged that to Eobert M. La Follette
should be given whatever credit is due for the ultimate adoption of
the primary election system in Wisconsin. While others may have
originated the plan and dreamed over its success at some future
time, he took the matter in both hands and went out to cultivate the
crop, even if he did not sow all the seed. As a platform. orator he
has strong points. He is intense, he is dramatic, he is forceful. He
faces his audiences with flashing eye and a forty-man power energy.
He convinces by sheer force of eloquence — ^not spontaneous, but care-
fully studied, and therefore effective. His hearers are swept along
with a flood of words and sentences which they have no time and
usually no disposition to weigh and analyze.

When such a man starts out to popularize a plan or idea he gets
a hearing. Mr. La Follette based his advocacy of the direct vote

22 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

plan of making nominations for office on the allegation that conven-
tions invariably were machine ruled and that the boss, omnipresent
in the political world and ranging in degree from the little minnow
bosses in the townships and wards to the big whale boss that gov-
erned the state, could be overthrown in no other way. He was par-
ticularly severe on the railway corporations, and their officials, who
were supposed to control party conventions with the help of the
bosses, great and small. He professed to see corruption of the most
offensive kind on every hand as the sole result of convention mani-
pulation; he saw corporations uniting with professional politicians
for the enslavement of the people, the control of legislation, the
tempting of executive and administrative public servants from the
path of rectitude. The one sovereign remedy that appealed to him
was the abolition of conventions. Probably a more depressing,
pessimistic word picture of alleged total depravity was never pre-
sented to the public for its enlightenment than the one held up by
Mr. La Follette as an accurate portrayal of conditions from which he
drew his inspiration to push forward the primary election movement.

Mr. La Follette delivered his address before the students at
Ann Arbor in March, 1898. On March 21, 1898, the first draft of
a tentative primary bill prepared by L. J. Nash, the Manitowoc law-
yer, was printed in The Milwaukee Sentinel. Mr. Nash perfected
his measure later, and in August of that year he caused several hun-
dred copies to be printed and circulated among leading men of the
state, educators and members of the legislature. It has been said
that a copy of the Nash bill was in the hands of the men who framed
the primary bill in 1901, but there is no record evidence of that fact.

In presenting his proposed measure for the consideration of pub-
lic spirited citizens, Mr. Nash did not take the position of an alarm-
ist. He believed public sentiment was changing and that the time
was rapidly approaching when there would be no occasion for de-
bate. "If thoughful men are not now unanimous on this subject it
is believed that they will fast become so," he said in a preface to his
printed bill. His explanation of the reasons that prompted him to
prepare the measure and offer it to students of the subject for exam- ■
ination and criticism were stated in a few words. He said :

"The draft of a primary election law presented In the following
pages is the offspring of a belief that it has become the duty of the
state to take into its own hands the whole machinery by which candi-
dates for public office are selected, and to restrain the activity of
political parties within its legitimate field, education; compelling
them to abandon office getting mainly through organization and
organization " mainly for office getting as their principal reason for
existence, and to substitute the function of teaching public policy
and inculcating political doctrine as their primary object while allow-
ing them to win the great political offices through the success of their
propaganda. All this should be done, of course, by laws that are
both in their provisions and their administration judicially fair to
every party alike and to the unorganized independent voter."

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaey. 23

There is no evidence at hand that Mr. Nash had a selfish motive
in preparing and presenting his measure to the public and it must
be conceded that he was inspired by worthy purposes. He brought
to the task a trained legal mind and an experience as a practicing
attorney that had won him distinction at the bar. But at best his
knowledge of the subject treated was purely academic. The trials
made of the direct vote system of making nominations had been eon-
ducted in limited spheres and one of the most serious objections to
the plan was thereby evaded.

The Nash bill provided for two primaries. At the first a prelim-
inary vote was taken to place candidates in the field; at the second
the candidates were nominated. The regular election machinery of
th^ townships and wards was to be used for operating the primaries.
All primaries were to be held at the same time and place. Bxistiag
laws were to be made a part of the new law and the qualifications of
voters in the primaries were to be the same as at general elections.
The candidates for governor and lieutenant governor were to be
nomiuated at the primary, but it was provided that the candidate
for governor was to name the candidates for other places on the state
ticket — to appoint his cabinet as it were, and submit their names to
the voters for confirmation or rejection. Provision also was made
for placing independent, or fusion tickets in the field.

24 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE V.
In the Spring of 1900.

Early in the Spring of 1900 the belief became general that Mr.
La FoUette would make another trial to win the nomination for
governor at the hands of the republican party. That he always had
intended to be a candidate there can be no reasonable doubt, but no
public declaration of that intention was made until May 16, at which
time a mild, conciliatory announcement addressed to the republican
voters of Wisconsin was printed in The Milwaukee Sentinel, then
owned and managed by men who were his strong partisans. In that
announcement the primary election movement was not specifically
mentioned, but reference was made to the fact that he had, with
others, labored for years "to secure the recognition of certain prin-
ciples as just, equitable, and republican." As he referred to taxa-
tion reforms, presumably as an interpretation of the statement quot-
ed, and as no further hint was given of his purpose to push his pri-
mary ideas to a revolutionary issue, little, if any, thought was given
to the subject, the announcement being regarded as the formal utter-
ance of a candidate who desired to make the best possihle impression
without saying anything that would give offense or occasion for
alarm.

The announcement opened the campaign in earnest, as five other
candidates were then in the field. They were : State Senators De-
Wayne Stebbins, John M. Whitehead, A. M. Jones ; the Hon. Ira B.
Bradford and Gen. Earl M. Rogers.

On May 31, as a means of heading off a rumor that he would, if
elected governor, use the position to attempt the defeat of U. S. Sen-
ator John C. Spooner for re-election, Mr. La Follette came out in a
public statement, also printed in The Sentinel, which pledged his ab-
splute' neutrality in the selection of a successor to Senator Spooner.
He stated in so many words that he would do nothing to interfere
with Senator Spooner's re-election, but that he would confine him-
self entirely to the duties of his office with the hope of earning and
securing a renomination at the expiration of his first term. He in-
timated that his purposes were peaceful and that he hoped for har-
mony hereafter.

The closing sentence of this statement was a significant one, in
that it shows to what extent he wished it to be understood the change
of heart professed by him had affected his attitude toward the other
leaders of the party in the state. During the campaign of 1898 an
attack had been made upon Gov. Scofield by means of a pamphlet
"published by direction of the republican club of Milwaukee coun-
ty," that was unique in the history of Wisconsin politics. It was so
bitter in tone, so malicious in character, so utterly unjust and heart-
lessly eruel that it raised up friends for Gov. Scofield on every hand.

The Evolution and Revolction op the Primary. ,25

The republican club of Milwaukee county was a La Follette organi-
zation and the members were in constant communication with the
Madison branch of that republican faction.

In his explanation of May 31, he referred to the pamphlet in the
following language :

"In this connection, it may be as well to say something with ref-
erence to my candidacy of two years ago. My reasons for being a
candidate at that time were justified and emphasized by the conven-
tion in its platform. It has been largely the faithful observance of
the pledges then given which entitles Gov. Scofield's administration,
at this time, to public approval, in which X heartily join. Some
phases of that campaign not within my control I should have been
glad to have seen omitted. For them I should not be held responsible
any more than my opponents in this campaign should be blamed for
the personal attacks now being made upon myself."

Historical accuracy demands that the false impression conveyed
in the last sentence of the paragraph quoted sKould be challenged.
Mr. La Follette was not slandered, maligned or abused in that cam-
paign by any opponent. His republicanism was questioned, that
was all.

Among the first conventions called in the state were the two held
in the Waukesha assembly districts, the home of State Senator A. M.
Jones, a candidate for the nomination against Mr. La Follette. It
was in this county that the decisive battle was fought and won by the
friends of the Madison man. Mr. La Follette had a perfect organiza-
tion in Waukesha and Milwaukee counties and Mr. Jones was weak-
ened by the loss of the anti-La Follette support that -had served in
the past to keep that gentleman in check. The Waukesha campaign
was in the main conducted from Milwaukee; the plans were laid in
Milwaukee and a large part of the money required to meet expenses
was furnished by the Milwaukee friends. Mr. Jones was defeated
in both districts and on June 30, the day the first district convention
was held, he withdrew from the race. On July 2 The Sentinel
printed the following explanation of the situation at that time:

"For two weeks past the air has been full of talk of a combined
opposition to the La Follette movement, but it is now freely admitted
that this is only talk; that there is no such movement. Mr. Payne,
who expects to devote his whole time to the national campaign, is
evidently not going to interfere in the preliminary contest for the
nomination in Wisconsin or any other state. As a national com-
mitteeman and one of the managers of the presidential campaign-
he will have to be in touch with the various state republican cam-
paigns, including that in Wisconsin, and he can not therefore inter-
fere, although it is no secret that he would prefer some other candi-
date' than Mr. La Follette. There is no sign that either Senator
Spooner or Senator Quarles is trying to organize any movement for
or against any candidate for governor, and friends of both of them
have said they have no such intention. Under the circumstances the
possibility of any such movement, if it was ever contemplated by any
one, may be said to have passed."

Mr. Bradford retired from .the race on July 3 ; on July 6 Mr.
Whitehead withdrew; July 14 Gen. Eogers sent in his announcement

26 Political Rbfobm: iw Wisconsin.

of withdrawal ; Senator Stebbins held on until July 34, when he, too,
stepped out of the race, leaving the track to Mr. La FoUette, who at
this time had an overwhelming majority of the delegates elected and
more than half the counties of the state had held their conventions.
And still Mr. La FoUette held his peace with respect to the primary
election idea.

In the latter part of July, however, when his nomination was
assured beyond peradventure, Mr. La Follette sent for some of his
Milwaukee friends for a conference at Madison. He handed them a
copy of his Ann Arbor address on primary elections and asked them
to look it over. He explained that he had given the subject deep
study, that he understood it thoroughly and wanted a plank in the
forthcoming republican platform committing the party irrevocably
to the enactment of a primary law. For the purpose of arousing
public sentiment he desired that a large number of pamphlets be
printed and distributed and asked that the necessary money be con-
tributed to his campaign fund to make this possible. His Ann
Arbor speech contained a severe arraignment of railroad oflScers
which was evidently directed against the presidents of the leading
lines in this state. Mr. La Follette was told that it would be unfair
and an evidence of bad faith to print and circulate at such a time,
after months of silence during which he had received the support
of the railroad companies through their officers, an address in which
those same men and corporations were held up to public scorn as
types of everything that is mercenary, dishonest and corrupt. He
was also reminded that he had given his personal pledge to the rail-
road officials that he would cease his unjust attacks upon them in re-
turn for their support in the campaign then on, and that he should
abide by his promise. He was also reminded that a primary law
was no part of the harmony program that he had himself promoted
and that if he desired to force a primary plank into the republican
platform he should have so stated when he announced himself as a
candidate. He acknowledged the force of the argument so far as
his reference to railroads was concerned and agreed that the intem-
perate language contained in the address as it was originally written
should be stricken out, but insisted that the pamphlet be printed in
revised form and circulated, which was done.

As further evidence of his peaceful frame of mind, Mr. La Fol-
lette prepared and printed with the address an introduction in which
the astonishing statement was made that primary elections were
needed to guard against waves of popular indignation that were
likely to injuriously affect legislation. He proposed the primary as
a safeguard against aroused public prejudice. Here is his own lan-
guage on the subject :

"For many years, through the press and from the platform, I
have earnestly endeavored to fix public thought upon this most Im-
portant subject, because It is the foundation of representative gov-
ernment. The entire superstructure rests upon the nomination of

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimaey. 27

candidates for office. Under the caucus and convention system a
wave of popular interest or indignation may sweep over a state,
occasioned by some special or peculiar wrong, and a much aroused
public sentiment take charge of the nomination of candidates for
the time being. But wrongs righted in this way are liable to carry
legislation to the extreme, work positive harm to important interests,
discredit reform and cause reaction, resulting In disappointment and
loss of public interest. Relaxation of public interest invites fresh
encroachments upon the rights of the people, and, ultimately, recur-
ring and spasmodic efforts to remedy evils."

The address with the introduction was iirst printed in The State,
Mr. La Pollette's personal organ, during the week ending July 28,
and the introduction in The SentTnel on July 28, 1900, all these
publications being made after the opposition to Mr. La Pollette
had collapsed and all the candidates opposed to him, withdrawn.

The platform pledge inserted by the convention at the request
of Mr. La Follette was all that he asked. It called for the abolition
of all caucuses and conventions and the nomination of all candidates
by a direct vote. Its language was unequivocal and definite, as fol-
lows:

"The great reformation effected in our general elections through
the Australian ballot inspires us with confidence to apply the same
method in making nominations so that every voter may exercise his
sovereign right of choice by . direct vote without the intervention or
Interference of any political agency. We therefore demand (recom-
mend) that caucuses and conventions for the nomination of candi-
dates for office be abolished by legislative enactment, and that all
candidates for state, legislative, congressional and county officers be
nominated by a prlinary election upon the same day by direct vote
under the Australian ballot."

2S Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE VI.
A Hakmonioos Campaign.

Having succeeded in securing the nomination, Mr. La Follette
went into the campaign with the solid strength of a united party be-
hind him. There had been defections or bolting on the part of
some of his followers in 1896 and again in 1898, but there was noth-
ing of the kind in 1900. His net majority over his four competitors
on election day was 103,745. The campaign was a vigorous one, and
in every address delivered by hftn Mr. La Follette explained his
primary election theory and appealed for support in his efforts to
secure for Wisconsin the great blessings he professed to believe
would follow the enactment of such a law.

The student of events will look in vain for any indication of a
split in the republican party during the campaign of 1900, or any
indication that a political eruption was impending. During the
campaign the republican state central committee maintained offices
at the Pfi-ster hotel, the old republican headquarters. At the head
of that committee as chairman was Gen. George E. Bryant, who was
considered as a sort of political godfather to Mr. La Follette, and a
large majority of the members of that body were dyed in the wool
La Follette men. The campaign expenses were met in the usual
way, the usual contributors chipping into the hat to create a fund
with which to pay the cost incidental to maintaining speakers in the
field, circulating literature, and perfecting a party organization in
the several counties. A special train was engaged to take the candi-
date for governor through the state, to the end that he might meet
his engagements with as little strain upon his physical strength as
possible. All was harmony, cordial good fellowship, and hope that
the factional differences that had more than threatened in former
years had permanently disappeared.

After the close of the campaign, conditions remained unchanged.
The white winged dove of peace had become the emblem of the
Wisconsin republicans and she no longer lived in terror of being
cooked or eaten raw by frenzied faetionists. The republican state
central committee met on Dec. 13 at the Pfister hotel and there ex-
changed congratulations and attended a banquet spread at the behest
of their chairman in their honor. On Dec. 1 the governor-elect, who
had returned that day from an Indiana health resort, where he had
gone to recover from the fatigue of the campaign, gave to The Mil-
waukee Sentinel an interview which was printed on the first page of
that, paper the following morning. Brotherly love, harmony, sweet
reasonableness and everything desirable and comfortable to have
around were the lot of republicans at that particular time. In his
interview Gov, La Follette said ;

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaet. 29

"I wish to express my appreciation of the splendid support I re-
ceived during the campaign. The campaign was ably managed by
Gen. Bryant and Secretaries Host and Rlchter of the republican state
central committee. They ran a thorough, clean campaign, and I
commend them for their work and thank them for it. I deeply ap-
preciate the support I had, both here at home and throughout the
state. The gold democrats have again demonstrated their fidelity
to principle in a striking manner. The large plurality given the
republican ticket is a strong indorsement of the principles set forth
in the republican state platform and shows that we have a united
party to stand for those measures to which the party was pledged nt
the last state convention."

That was the situation when Eobert M. La Pollette was inaugur-
ated governor of Wisconsin in January, 1901. He had been elected
governor hy "a united party." He was governor of the sta,te and as
such was entitled to the respect of all citizens, regardless of party.
A majority of the members of both houses of the legislature elected
with him were in sympathy with every reform movement that had
been proposed or mentioned in the platform. No deadfalls had
been set to catch him and no pits had been dug for him to fall into.
There were men who believed he had made an unjust and malicious
attack upon his predecessor, Gov. Scofield, in 1898, who were not too
confident of the future, but they hoped for the best and were deter-
mined to give him a fair trial. No man could have been inducted
into high office under conditions favoring him more than those that
attended the inauguration of Gov. Eobert M. La Follette.

A brief explanation is required here in order to clear away a
misunderstanding, purposely created, that has influenced the minds
of certain citizens. It was said that eleven state senators met in
Milwaukee on December 13, at the time of the meeting of the state
central committee already mentioned, for the purpose of devising a
plan to organize the senate in opposition to the governor. The eleven
senators who attended a meeting on that day were composed of three
La Pollette men, seven who were not unfriendly to him, although
they were not in sympathy with what they believed to be his tendency
to radicalism, and one who had little if any faith in him, but was
willing to give him a chance to "make good." The La Follette men
were Edgar G. Mills, Superior; Andrew L. Kreutzer, Wausau, and
D. E. Riordan, Eagle River. The "fair minded" senators were
Julius E. Eoehr, J. H. Green and William Devos of Milwaukee;
John Harris, Elkhorn; J. A. Willy, Appleton; H. Hagemeister,
Green Bay, and John Reynolds, Kenosha. The one senator who
was sleeping on his arm as a matter of precaution was A. M. Jones of
Waukesha.

This meeting was held for the purpose of talking over informally
the makeup of the senate committees. The state senate, unlike the
assembly, selects its own committees. The assignments are not
made on the spur of the moment on the day the senate meets. They
are the result of conferences, deliberation, correspondence, during

30 Political Refohm in Wisconsin.

which the wishes of the senators themselves are consulted so far as
is possible. At the meeting referred to there were eleven members
of that body out of a total of thirty-one republicans. At subsequent
meetings, all informal and some merely accidental, the subject of
committee assignments was discussed. When the members finally
came together at the opening of the session the business of this
-character not already determined — and there had been a number
of senators in attendance on the inauguration ceremonies — ^was
closed up. When the senate was called to order on Jan. 9, three
resolutions were introduced. Eesolution No. 1 invited the clergy
of Madison to open the daily sessions of the senate with prayer.
Eesolution No. 2 instructed the clerk to notify the assembly that the
senate had organized and was ready for business. Eesolution No.
3 introduced by Senator Stebbins, was the one appointing the com-
mittees of that body.

Had the meeting held in Milwaukee been antagonistic to Gov. La
Follette, called for the purpose of planning to defeat his pet measure,
the committee on privileges and elections would have been packed
against the primary election bill. As a matter of fact, the com-
mittee before whom that bill would come was made up of Senators
Hatton, Miller and Martin, three intense partisans of the governor ;
Senator Whitehead, a "progressive" who had taken a hand in prev-
ious primary legislation, who had helped to frame the corrupt prac-
tices act of 18^7, and who was a leader in all tax reform legislation;
and Senator Jones, the ultra-conservative.

With respect to this matter, one more point remains to be cleared
. up. In his message vetoing the Hagemeister bill several months
later. Gov. La Follette said, among other things :

"Immediately upon the organization of the legislature, many
weeks before any bill had been offered upon the subject of primary
election, it was boastingly announced and published that one of its
branches had been so organized as to defeat the passage of any
primary election legislation."

If such announcements and publications were made they were
without authority and were untrue in substance and detail. Organ-
ization to defeat primary election legislation would have begun with
the committee on privileges and elections. That committee was
favorable to primary election legislation. The legislature convened
on January 9 ; the Stevens primary bill was introduced in the as-
sembly by Mr. Stevens and in the senate by Senator George P. Miller
on January 28, nineteen days after the two houses convened. At
best, nineteen days is not "many weeks," and although the bill for
which the fight was finally made was a substitute, the statement of
the governor did not specify that particular substitute, but said the
alleged organization had been formed "many weeks before any bill
was offered upon the subject of primary elections."

The Evolution and REVOLtfTioN of the Pbimabt. 31

CHAPTER VII.
A Period op Uncertainty.

It is an interesting fact that, witji three noteworthy exceptions,
no man connected with the faction that subsequently fought Gov. La
Follette so bitterly can put his finger on the specific act of the gover-
nor that first aroused his ire, or name the exact time when he con-
cluded to paint his face, put feathers in his hair, and take to the
warpath. Most of them were surprised when they first realized that
they had left the reservation and were armed and equipped for
battle. At the outset there was considerable interest, not of a hostile
character, however, in the steps to be taken to fulfill the platform
pledge with respect to primary elections. It was conceded that the
pledge must be redeemed and it was supposed that all republicans
would be given an opportunity to express their sentiments upon the
subject. In his message the governor had explained his theories at
considerable length, just as he had explained them in 1898 and on
every possible occasion subsequent to that date, with the exception
previously noted, during the preceding campaign. It had been the
custom in the past for members to call at the executive chamber fre-
quently for informal consultations and conferences on all subjects
relating to legislation. The doors of the executive chamber always
had been open during office hours, and frequently long into the night
during legislative sessions, and visitors were welcomed and made to
feel at home.

But conditions were changed now. As the days passed it was
noticed that an air of mystery was beginning to gather about the
capitol building. Men were called to the executive chamber for
conferences, it is true, but they were carefully, selected from among
their fellows and the consultations were always held behind closed,
guarded doors. They were star chamber sessions of the most secret
Icind. Newspaper correspondents who had had the run of the ante-
room of the executive apartments in past years were frozen out
entirely or made to feel extremely uncomfortable while there. There
was an indefinable something in the atmosphere of the outer execu-
tive office that made it impossible for certain visitors to penetrate far
beyond the portals with any degree of ease.

Long before any attempt was made to organize a faction in op-
pQsition to the governor there was a faction organized and dis-
ciplined to carry out his program. His line of battle was formed
to fight a foe not yet in existence; his generals, aids and lieuten-
ants were appointed and entered upon the discharge of their duties.
The atmosphere of mystery that at first enveloped the executive
chamber only, spread to the entire capitol — legislative chambers,
committee rooms, corridors, even the cloakrooms and closets.
There were little gatherings where whispered consultations^ were

32 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

held; there was evasion, suspicion, secrecy on every hand. Every
employee in the state house that could be dragooned into the ranks
was made a secret service agent in addition to performing his reg-
ular clerical duties. Two men would be talking in a corridor and
a third would approach; instantly there would be warning glances
exchanged and the two would separate, to be seen again a few min-
utes later continuing the conversation. A true blue administra-
tion supporter would shy at the coming of an outsider as if the in-
truder were afflicted with a contagious disease, for the servant of
the executive feared he would be suspected of disloyalty should he
be caught in friendly converse with one not yet initiated into the
•sacred arcana and possessed of the countersign, grip and password.

All this may sound like a childish fairy tale to one who did not
go through that experience, but it is the bald, literal truth- never-
theless. Those who visited the state house at Madison during
that memorable. session either on business or pleasure bent, be-
came eonsciotis at once of the changed atmosphere, the oppressive
psychic force with which the capitol was charged as with an electric
current. It is this same force that has in the past, under condi-
tions favorable to such results, brought about great religious re-
vivals, panics, or lynchings, as the case might be.

But although the situation described was enough to cause a dan-
gerous tension. Gov. La Follette did not appear to appreciate that
fact, if he is to be given credit for desiring to avoid a factional
war. At air events, if his purpose was one in which peace and
progress had a part, he displayed a lamentable lack of tact in deal-
ing with members of the legislature. He did not appear to know
how to treat with equals. He was wonderfully persuasive at times
and his influence over some of his adherents had many of the
characteristics of hj^notism. In no other way can be explained
their consent to become involved in a political intrigue that would
have been in place in a Latin American republic, but which was en-
tirely foreign to Wisconsin methods.

When flattery and cajolery failed and the hypnotic spell would
not work, it was the governor's invariable custom to appeal .to the
cupidity or fear of the man he wished to influence. The frank,
open manliness that should have characterized the intercourse of
legislators with one another and with the executive and adminis-
trative department was wanting from the day the legislature con-
vened. In place of reason there were plottings. In place of a
free interchange of opinions there were lightfooted messengers hur-
rying about the capitol, mysterious messages delivered with nods
and winks and sidelong glances, and star chamber sessions of
"friends of the administration."

But Gov. La Follette did not always succeed in his efforts to
influence even his friends and hold them in line for the full pro-
gram prepared by himself. There were three men at least who

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primaet. 33

knew when their attitude of friendliness toward the governor and
prejudice in favor of his legislative program ceased. 'Ekch was
called in turn to the executive chamber for an executive session.
Each had ideas of his own which he had expressed freely without
having iirst had thfem indorsed by the governor. They were
brought "under the influence" which was expected to make them
pliable and responsive to the word of command. When these men
came away from the conferences there was blood in their eyes and
their souls were congested with language it were a sin to repeat, or
even think.

They made no secret of the fact that they had become insur-
gents — as they now would be called. They were all state sena-
tors and their names were O'Niel, Kreutzer, and Eiordan.

The condition of public sentiment on" the primary election
movement when the legislature convened in January, 1901, is
clearly illustrated by the attitude of the newspapers of that day.
As there was no division in the republican party, it will be con-
ceded that the newspapers reflected the real sentiments of the peo-
ple, so far as the people had been able to form opinions, and that
they were not guided by factional prejudices. There had been con-
siderable public discussion of the subject, it is true. In his mes-
sage vetoing the Hagemeister bill four months later Gov. La Fol-
lette told what had been done to inform the voters relative to the
merits of the primary election reform. He said;

"Whatever was done was solely with the view of stimulating
thought, and argument of the measure upon its merits. From
platform and pulpit, before agricultural societies, good govern-
ment clubs, political clubs, debating societies, in the school houses
and public halls, wherever men were gathered together, the dang-
ers which threatened representative government were discussed,
the causes plainly traced to the selection of candidates by the
bosses, the vital importance of election by the people by direct
vote, and the necessary provisions of a primary law were fully
and fairly presented. The press of the state almost without ex-
ception gave the subject editorial treatment from time to time,
while the leading periodicals and magazines of the country, widely
read by our people, devoted much space to its consideration.
Hundreds of thousands of pamphlets and addresses presenting every
phase of the issue and meeting the arguments and objections of the
opposition were distributed throughout the state. The entire matter
was thoroughly well understood."

But, granting that a persistent and energetic campaign had
been waged in the interests of the movement, there was still a
marked lack of enthusiasm manifested, and, so far as the newspa-
pers were able to judge, a grave doubt existed of the ability of the
legislature to invent a workable plan for putting the theoretical
reform into practical operation. At all events, sentiment was not
united in favor of the movement, as the governor appears to have
believed.

Few of the leading newspapers in the state pretended to speg,k

34 Political Refokm in Wisconsiit.

with authority on the subject. The Milwaukee Sentinel and Daily
News were both unqualifiedly in favor of the governor's plan of
reforming the method of selecting candidates. The Sentinel was
at that time the La Follette personal organ, its chief editorial writ-
er, Jerre C. Murphy, having been appointed to the position of
private secretary to the governor. The Daily News had, since
1896, -been the leading "progressive" democratic paper of the
state, and as such it supported the primary election movement
from the beginning, although the democratic party had not consist-
ently committed itself to that reform. In 1900 the democratic
state platform contented itself with merely condemning the "pres-
ent caucus law" as a "complicated and expensive nominating sys-
tem," and favored a revision that would "result in a simple, direct,
and inexpensive method of nominating candidates for office."

The Milwaukee Journal adopted a come-let-us-reason-together
editorial tone that had all the appearance of suppressed hostility,
which later developed into open antagonism. The Evening "Wis-
consin was noncommittal as to the primary election bill while all
ttie time it was frankly and unmistakably friendly to the governor.

So far as the country press were concerned, there were a large
number of the newspapers that did not take part in the discussion,
their publishers being manifestly "on the fence," or unalilc to, de-
cide the matter to their own satisfaction. At that time the Mil-
waukee Journal was devoting considerable space to the country
press, printing excerpts from editorials and commenting on them.
In newspaper parlance, it was "featuring its state press column."
On February 22, 1901, it compiled from that department a list of
fifty-nine papers that had exprgssed opinions on the subject of the
proposed primary election law. Of that number twenty-two were
friendly to the bill and thirty-seven were opposed to it. Of those
that favored the measure, two were independent, three were demo-
cratic, and seventeen were republican in sentiment. Of those op-
posed there were fifteen democratic, twenty-one republican, and
one independent. There was at least one republican daily in the
interior of the state that was opposed to the movement that does not
appear in the Journal's list.

One feature of the newspaper situation at the time worthy of
mention was the attitude of the Madison staff correspondents of the
Evening Wisconsin and the Milwaukee Journal. The latter paper
was represented at Madison by Ellis B. Usher, a gold democrat.
The Evening Wisconsin's staff correspondent was Col. Dan. B.
Starkey, late private secretary to Gov. Scofield. Both of these men
were given considerable lattitude by their papers and they signed
their letters. While the papers did not take a stand against the
primary movement, both Usher and Starkey made no secret of
their personal opposition to the attempt at reform legislation of
that character. Col. Starkey, whose work always had been in the

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primary. 35

news department, naturally gave his letters the appearance of news
reports, while Mr. Usher, a former publisher and editorial writer,
followed the habit of years and wrote what' may be called editorial
news letters to his paper. Some of the strongest arguments ever
printed against the primary election movement may be found in
the letters written by Mr. Usher to the Milwaukee Journal during
that memorable session of the legislature.

One of the most important events of the winter — the most im-
portant so far as relates to the newspaper situation — was the sale
of The Milwaukee Sentinel in February. Up to that time The
Sentinel had been owned and edited by ultra-La Follette supporters.
By the change of ownership it became the property of Charles P.
Pfister, who had been a neutral during the pre-convention period
and a supporter of Gov. La Follette ih the campaign for the elec-
tion of the republican state ticket. The editorial announcing the
change, written by the new editor in chief, Lansing Warren, in-
dicated that The Sentinel would be a consistent, conservative, loyal
republican paper under the new management.

36 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTER VIII.
Opposition to the Pkimaky Bill Develops.

The administration primary election bill was introduied in the
assembly by E. Ray Stevens and in the senate by George F. Miller,
on Jan. 28. These men were members of the committee on privil-
eges and elections in their respective houses and a majority of each
committee was in favor of the bill as introduced. At that time
there did not appear to be any doubt about the passage of the bill
substantially in the form as introduced. Whatever dissent there
may have been in the minds of individual legislators was merely
passive ; there was no organized opposition. Even the most conser-
vative members of the two houses declined to commit themselves
in a public statement, explaining that; they had" not been able to
give the measure the consideration it required in order to inform
themselves with respect to its merits or demerits. Col. Starkey re-
ported to the Evening Wisconsin that the bill would surely pass and"
become a law.

The first hearing on the measure was held before a joint meet-
ing of the committees of the two houses on Feb. 13, at which time
H. C. Adams, Gov. La Follette's dairy and food commissioner, and
H. C. Taylor, Orfordville, appeared for the bill, and James G.
Monahan, collector of revenue for the western Wisconsin district,
appeared in opposition.

It was charged later that Mr. Monahan, a federal office holder,
was the spokesman of an organized movement acting under in-
structions from persons "higher up." As proof of the truth of this
indictment it was shown that, on Feb. 4, a circular letter had been
sent out from Darlington, Mr. Monahan's home city, signed by
George F. West and addressed to republicans who had attended
the republican county convention for Lafayette county as delegates
the previous year. This letter was .a protest against the passage
of the primary bill by Mr. West, who had been a delegate to the re-
publican state convention in August, 1900. He explained that, as
such delegate, he had not voted for a measure like the one introduc-
ed in the legislature when the platform was adopted and did not
believe the republicans of Wisconsin were in favor of such a law.
He asked those to whom the circular was addressed to sign a pro-
test, for which a form was inclosed, to be sent to members of the
legislature.

On February 11 The Sentinel printed a news dispatch from
Madison in which reference was made to the West circular letter
and it was asserted that "federal officeholders in the state are mak-
ing a campaign to defeat the primary election bill." Mr. Mona-
han, United States District Attorney W. G. Wheeler, and Edwin
D. Coe, United States pension agent, were all mentioned by name.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaby. • 37

Mr. Wheeler's offense was in having been seen about the corridors
of the capitol building and Mr_. Coe was charged with having writ-
ten newspaper articles and letters in which the primary election
proposition was criticised. It was intimated that "some influence
was working against the bill," the inference being that United
States Senators Spooner and Quarles had taken a hand in the mat-
ter and were acting through the federal officeholders.

When the hearing was held before the committees meeting in
joint session, Mr. Monahan prefaced his address with a personal
statement to the effect that he had not counseled with either of the
senators on the primary bill. He denied that he had ever talked
with Senator Quarles on the subject and had not seen or heard
from that gentleman in months except once, when he received a let-
ter from him relating to a pension matter. He had never talked
with Senator Spooner on the subject but once, and that was "a few
moments, months ago." He denied that there was any combina-
tion of officeholders to defeat the -bill and claimed for himself the
right to express his personal opinions on this or any other matter
pending before the legislature.

In the face of this definite denial, the original article in which
the charge was made was mailed the following day from the office
of Gov. La FoUette in packages containing the governor's Ann Ar-
bor address, H. C. Adams' address and the speech made by .Mr.
Taylor of Orfordville. These packages were sent to 50,000 Wis-
consin voters. Even at that early day it was an offense to mail a
protest to a few delegates in Lafayette county, while it was permit-
ted to sow circulars broadcast throughout the state accompanied
by a statement the truth of which already had been challenged by
a man who knew the facts, provided the circulars were designed to
aid the administration. Gov. La PoUette reiterated the charge
against the federal officers when he wrote his Hagemeister bill
veto message.

Mr. Adams' address was the keynote speech -in support of the
primary bill. Mr. Adams held an appointive position under the
governor, but no objection was ever filed against his activity in the
campaign for the primary law. He had served as chairman of the
republican state convention the previous August, and, in putting the
motion to adopt the platform he had failed to call for the nega-
tive vote, declaring the motion carried unanimously after the af-
firmative vote had been taken. Mr. Adams also had participated
in the labors of the framers of the bill and it was understood that
he contributed materially to the work of unraveling some of the
most perplexing tangles that confronted them. He was thoroughly
familiar with the subject and was, by natural ability and careful
preparation, the best man that could have been- selected for the task
of opening the debate.

There is probably nowhere in the literature on the subject an

38 • Political Reform in Wisconsin.

abler defense of the primary election theory in general and the
Stevens bill in particular than the address delivered by Mr. Adams
on that occasion. It was a masterly argument, consummately art-
ful, clear, concise, forceful, and convincing. The reasons given
for favoring the measure were identical with those advanced by
Gov. La Pollette in his published addresses and his message to the
legislature — a desire to give every voter an opportunity to express
his choice of candidates by a direct vote under the Australian bal-
lot system and to take from the political machine, the political boss,
the power to manipulate conventions and thereby defeat the will
of the voters. Mr. Adams went over the primary bill and explain-
ed its provisions, showing how it was expected to accomplish the
objects sought, and closed with an eloquent appeal to the commit-
tee — and incidentally to the members of the legislature who
thronged the chamber where the hearing was held — -to support the
measure and write it into the statute books of the state.

Mr. Monahan attacked the 'bill in general and in detail. In his
opinion its tendency was populistie, and not republican. Speci-
fically, he enumerated the following objections to the bill as it
was framed, but he did not ask that it be changed, expressing a be-
lief that it could not be improved, being wrong in principle :

"First — The method provided for getting names upon the pri-
mary ticket would be burdensome, expensive, and calculated to retire
from politics modest men who would not seek office, -to 'increase
the activity of the boodler and professional politician, lengthen the
arm of the boss, and increase the strength of every machine in the
state.'

"Second — It would give the cities practical control of the nomi-
nation of candidates.

"Third — The bill would impose a tax of approximately $150,000
upon the people of the state. 'Unnecessary taxation is unjust taxa-
tion.'

"Fourth — Under the provisions of this bill we would abandon the
system that the majority shall rule for one that minorities may
govern.

"Fifth — This bill takes away from the people the right to make
platforms and gives the power to candidates for office.

"Sixth — The provisions of the bill make it impossible to consider
location or nationality in the nomination of candidates.

"Seventh — The bill in principle is a long step toward the aband-
onment of representative government, bequeathed to us by the found-
ers of this government, for the vagaries of populism."

Subsequent meetings were held at which speeches were made
for and against the proposed law. Those appearing for the meas-
ure were James A. Frear, Hudson; L. H. Bancroft, Eichland Cen-
ter; P. M. Miner, Eau Claire; W. G. Corrigan, Plainfield; John
Strange, Oshkosh. The speakers who opposed it were M. G. Jef-
fris, Janesville; Henry Fink, Milwaukee; H. H. Hayden, Eau
Claire. H. W. Chynoweth of Madison closed the debate by appear-
ing and summing up for the supporters of the bill on Feb. 26.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimart. 39

Prom the time the first opposition was manifested until Mr. Chy-
noweth's_ address was delivered as the last word on the subject from
one who personally represented the governor there had heen talk of a
compromise measure. It had been suggested that candidates for
county offices and for the legislature be nominated at the primary
and all other candidates nominated and platforms made at con-
ventions. Another suggested measure provided for the nomination
of candidates for county offices only at the primary. Still another
proposal was that the primary be confined for the time being to a
particular section of the state where it could be tried out, to be ex-
tended to the entire state if found to work satisfactorily. The day
following Mr. Chynoweth's address, however, the following para-
graph appeared in Col. Starkey's dispatch to tjie Evening Wiscon-
sin, announcing that a damper had been -put upon all compromise
efforts :

"All hope of a compromise is now at an end. Mr. Chynoweth
boldly declared last night that Gov. La Follette was behind the bill
demanding its passage as the reward of victory, and the governor is
determined not to yield an iota so far as the main features of the
bill are concerned."

Still another incident illustrates how an end was put to the
compromise talk. The Sentinel had formally changed hands on
Feb. 19, but no mention was made of the primary election bill for
several days, or until Mr. Warren, the new editor, could visit Madi-
son and talk with the governor. That visit was made on Feb. 36,
the day Mr. Chynoweth appeared before the committee, and Mr.
Warren called at the executive chamber and had a conference with
Gov. La Follette.

Mr. Warren later related to friends the story of that meeting,
but, although Gov. La Follette never deigned to deny in person the
accuracy of Mr. Warren's narrative, his friends did make such
denial. Mr. Warren's subsequent acts, however, are enough to
indicate the tenor of the conversation and the outcome of the con-
ference.

Mr. Warren went to Madison on a peaceful mission. So much
is known definitely by many. He hoped to come to an understand-
ing by which The Sentinel could support La Follette and his
administration. He made no secret of his purposes. Among other
things he proposed to suggest certain amendments, or modifica-
tions, of the primary election bill. The interests of the republican
party as a political organization were at stake, and he hoped, as the
editor of the leading republican paper of the state, to secure a
respectful hearing for his views and to arrive at an understanding
by which a division in the party could be avoided and the harmony
that had resulted from Gov. La FoUette's nomination, but which
was threatened by the exasperating circumstances attending the in-
cubation and final hatching of the primary bill, might' be saved
from total wreck. '

40 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

On his return to Milwaukee, Mr. Warren wrote, in a railway
coach, an editorial which, although the meeting with Gov. La Fol-
lette is not mentioned, speaks plainly as to the result of that at-
tempt on his part to arrive at an understanding. He said :

"In its present form the Stevens primary election bill can not
become a law because Wisconsin is a loyal republican state.

"The objections to the bill, as drawn, are specifically too varied
and self-evident to call for enumeration. In general terms, it may
be fairly characterized as radical to a populistic degree and revolu-
tionary in the worse sense of the word.

"The obliteration of all caucusses and conventions means the
temporary destruction of all party organization in Wisconsin, and
that is the chief end and aim of the experimental measure.

"The only logical argument in- favor of the bill is that its salient
features were indorsed by the republican state convention. It is an
interesting coincidence that this proposed legislation should have de-
rived its chief excuse for existence from one of the 'corrupting con-
ventions' which it was designed to wipe off the face of the earth.
It is not at all certain that this same convention did not extend its
powers when it passed the platform which contained the pith of the
Stievens bill in one of Its planks. The legitimate function of a com-
mittee on resolutions is to enumerate principles and not to make
laws. According to the republican platform adopted in Milwaukee on
Aug. 8, 1900, by the republicans of Wisconsin in convention as-
sembled, some such legislative enactment as the primary election
bill was undoubtedly outlined and demanded. That convention, how-
ever, had not the authority to draft any specific bills or to insist on
any particular scheme of individual action on legislative measures.

"Conditions today must guide the legislators at Madison when
they vote for or against the Stevens bill. The friends of the mea-
sure will not submit to any amendment or alteration in its provisions,
nor will they consent to restrict its operations for two years to a few
counties to test its efficacy.

"Every senator and every assemblyman must gracefully swallow
the Stevens bolus or have it forced down his throat. This is the
dictum, of the j)olitical iconoclasts who must rule or ruin.

"These are some of the many reasons why the conservative, self-
respecting republicans of Wisconsin will not dare to stain the statute
books with the Stevens primary election bill."

This was the first editorial to appear in" The Sentinel in which
definite, unequivocal objection to the program of the governor was
made. In point of fact, it may be said that this was the first edi-
torial to appear in any paper in the state in which Gov. La Pollette
or his administration measure were criticised severely. As has
already been said, the Daily News was supporting him loyally and
advocating the passage of the primary election bill; the Evening
Wisconsin was friendly to him; the Journal was not disposed to
support the primary bill, but it had not printed any editorial crit-
icisms that the governor could take exceptions to ; The Sentinel had
been his personal organ, doing his bidding as completely as it would
were he in control of a majority of the stock of the company that
owned it. And he had then been in office forty-six 'days. Surely
this does not indicate that there was a conspiracy against Gov. La
Follette on the part of the conservatives when he was inaugurated.-

The ISvolution and Re\'olution of the Pbimaby. 41

CHAPTEE IX.'

The Pitched Battle.

The contest came to a head when the primary election bill was
reported by the committee of the assembly and the vote on passing
it to engrossment and third reading was taken. Day by day the
men opposed to the measure had been gaining confidence. They
even ceased talking about compromises as they began to hope they
could defeat the measure entirely. They no longer urged that as
a last resort the question be submitted to the people by referendum.
Dozens of men who had maintained a neutral position at first now
cahie out in opposition to the measure, having heard the arguments
before the committee and given the subject consideration on their ,
own account. There was a distinct educative value attached to
the controversy and the seeds sown were beginning to sprout.

Another factor was beginning to have an effect on the situation.
The close friends of the administration were attempting to convey
the impression that they were the anointed ones and in possession
of the ark of the covenant. To them was given the right to speak
with authority and they must be obeyed. To disagree with the gov-
ernor was represented as a peculiar species of treason complicated
with impiety, blasphemy, and lese majeste. Men who dared to
express opinions wimout having first had them vised at the execu-
tive chamber by the governor himself or by "Jerre" became poli-
tically unclean and were classed under three general heads as "cor-
ruptionists," "corporation corruptionists," or "corrupt hirelings."
The spirit of the master was breathed into the members of the fac-
tion and it was bitter as gall.

On Monday, March 18, the bill came before the assembly in the
form of a substitute reported for passage by the committee. Assem-
blyman John C. Karel dissenting. There was no material differ-
ence between the substitute and the original bill. The members
who signed the report were B. H. Steiger, chairman; B. Bay
Stevens, who gave his name to the bill; W. W. Andrew, W. J. Mid-
dleton, L. IST. Coapman, and John A. Henry. It was placed on the
calendar for Tuesday, the following day, and made a special order
for the evening of that day, the purpose being to railroad it through
"mder the whip.

Columns have been written and printed about that memorable
session of the assembly, beginning at 7 :30 p. m., March 19, 1901,
and. closing in the chill of an early March morning. In his veto
message returning the Hagemeister bill to the senate weeks later,
Gov. La Follette told the story as he wanted it printed in the legis-
lative records. Magazine contributors who revel in descriptive
writing have painted word pictures of it that were as vivid as a
rarebit dream. Stump speakers have described it in language that
made their audiences gasp and wonder to what extremities staid

42 Political Keform in Wisconsin.

old Wisconsin was drifting. And yet, it was not such a remarkable
session.

Before the bill could be brought to a vote, the question beiug
on engrossment and third reading, one of the members who was
opposed to its passage moved a "call of the house" and his motion
was supported. The member who made the motion was E. A.
Williams, a republican, who lived at Neenah. This was not such
an extraordinary proceeding. A "call of the house" had been made
that same day, March 19, on motion by Assemblyman -Eline of
Milwaukee, when senate bill Ko. 394 was under consideration. A
motion to suspend the rules and act on the bill at once had jijst
been taken and resulted in a vote of 65 to 19 in favor of the motion.
Mr. Bline, who was opposed to the bill, then moved a call and he
was sustained. In the case of the primary bill, a motion to substi-
tute the committee bill for the original Stevens bill had been made
and resulted in an affirmative vote of 53, negative 39, there being
at that time eight absent members. Had the friends of the bill
been able at any time during the night to muster fifty-one votes
they could have raised the call.

While the call was in force the members could transact no other
business. The sergeant at arms was out looking for members
absent without leave. The only motions that could be entertained
were "to dispense with further proceedings under the call," or "to
adjourn." Until the call could be raised, therefore, the only thing
the members could do was to visit. A long night passed under such
conditions naturally calls for some means of relieving the monotony
and passing the time, but there was nothing doing in the assembly
chamber that night that need call for special remark ; nothing that
ninety-two big, robust men, awake and looking for amusement,
would not be likely to do under similar conditions at any time.

But Gov. La Pollette did not see in that session an ordinary
occurrence. To his miud there was malicious villainy and cor-
rupt plotting at the bottom of the entire business. Although his
veto message was not written until nearly two months later, his
story of the conspiracy that came to a head on that eventful night
is worth repeating and should be considered in the light of known
facts. He said:

"Before the introduction of the primary election bill the attempt
was made to arouse distrust concerning it, and to thoroughly dis-
credit the measure in advance. Upon its presentation to the legis-
lature — so framed as to comply with the pledge made to the people
of the state — a systematic campaign of misrepresentation of the bill
and its supporters was industriously prosecuted. The general pur-
pose of the measure, the plain meaning of Its provisions, the certain
effect of the law in operation, the necessary and reasonable expense,
each and all furnished theme for persistent falsification and malicious
assault. An array of federal officeholders, joining with certain corp-
oration agents and representatives of the machine in the regular
legislative lobby, moved upon the capitol, took possession. of its cor-
ridors, intruded upon the legislative halls, followed members to their
hotels, tempted many with alluring forms of vice, and in some in-

The EvoLrUTioN and Revolution of the Primary. 43

stances brought them to the capitol in a state of intoxication to vote
against the bill. This sets forth in part the character of the opposi-
tion, but omits to take account of some of the means use4, or
attempted to be used, to prevent the passage of the measure."

This sounds like an indignant protest against specific acts be-
lieved to be subversive of good government and in conflict with the
higher political ethics. But before sharing in the governor's indig-
nation it is best to examine certain self evident facts that require
no affidavits to establish their reliability.

It is impossible to find a record of any "campaign of misrepre-
sentation of the bill and its supporters" after the bill was intro-
duced and while it was pending before the committee. The col-
umns of the newspapers do not give any indication of such a cam-
paign. The speeches made before the committee do not furnish
the evidence required. The fact that the opposition was entirely
at sea during that time was well known. With the exception of
Mr. Monahan, who adopted as his motto, "pass the bill or kill it,"
those opposed to the measure were in favor of a compromise, a
fact that is made evident by Mr. Chynoweth's. statement that a
compromise would not be considered. ,

Second — It is charged in the complaint that the campaign of
misrepresentation had to do with the "general purposes of the
measure, 'the plain meaning of its provisions, the certain effect of
the law in operation, and the necessary and reasonable expense."
Wisconsin people of today are in a position to know whether these
points were misrepresented or fairly considered.

Third — ^When the bill came up in the assembly under special
order there was a call of the house. A roll call revealed the fact
that five members were absent without leave and two with leave.
N"o business could be transacted until the five members were found
and escorted to the chamber, and no members could leave the cham-
ber while the call was in force. As this was the time when the mob
is supposed to have taken possession of the capitol, it may be of
interest to note that members could not be "followed to their
hotels" at a time when they could not leave the chamber, and no
man in his right mind would tempt a member with "alluring forms
of vice" under the conditions. that obtained in the chamber.

Fourth — The "array of federal office holders" consisted of James
G. Monahan, William G. Wheeler, and Henry Pink. These men
were present during the evening out of curi,osity and an aroused
interest in the question before the assembly. Two of them had
offices in Madison, and, having been interested in public affairs for
years, naturally drifted to the assembly chamber on that evening.
Neither of them remained until the close of the act. Mr. Fink
was in Madison on business. He did not go there to attend the
session, but, being there, he spent a part of the evening at the cap-
itol, as is his custom.

Fifth — If by "certain corporation agents" is meant the railroad

44 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

representatives at Madison, every member of the legislature knows
that they did not take a hand in the proceeding that evening.
There were important bills pending before the legislature in which
the railroads were interested and their representatives were careful
not to offend the governor. There had been no breach between the
corporations and the governor at that time. That came later.
The primary bill did not affect the railroads in any way and their
representatives were wise enough to keep "hands off" where the gov-
ernor's pet measure was concerned. Even if they had been dispos-
ed to oppose the bill, open opposition on their part would have been
sheer madness, and no one ever accused them of not knowing their
business.

Sixth — There was an unusual number of people at the capitol
during the early hours of the night when the call of the house was
in force. Many of them were interested in seeing the pending
bill defeated while others were interested in seeing it pass. All
had a right to be there. All were citizens of the state. The de-
bate had aroused interest in the measure and the knowledge that
it had been made a special order for that evening called out a
crowd, but the crowd did not all go there to work for or against the
bill. They were there out of curiosity, nothing more, and they did
not stay until the end. The workers for the bill were as active, if
not more so, than those who opposed it. Any reflection on the ac-
tivity displayed by the opponents of the measure will reflect with
equal force upon its friends.

Seventh — It is true that there was one instance where a mem-
ber was brought to the capitol "in a state of intoxication." The
case of this member was a peculiar one. When sober he was inclin-
ed to question the divine right of the governor; when intoxicated
he was an ardent administration supporter. He was under the in-
fluence of the administration workers when he became intoxicated
on that particular occasion, but he was stolen by the opposition
and locked in a committee room to sober off. There were dozens of
men in attendance that night who knew the facts relating to this
incident. It was common Imowledge among the members of the
legislature. The search for the missing man by the administra-
tion runners in was a warm one, but they did not find him until
the opposition were satisfied that he knew "where he was at." He
was reported present at 10 o'clock p. m., and remained in the cham-
ber during the night. He was entirely sober when he. voted against
the bill the following morning.

Another member who had slept off the effects of copious pota-
tions during the night was brought to the assembly chamber in the
ijaorning by the sergeant-at-arms and Henry Overbeck, an adminis-
tration "whip." This man voted to raise the call and to pass the
bill.. While he was not in a state of intoxication when brought to
the chamber, he was suffering from recent overindulgence and re-
fused to accompany the officer to the capitol until he was given a

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primary. 45

"bracer" to steady his nerves. The search for this member was a
long one because he had realized his condition and found a hiding
place into which the searchers could not penetrate. These were
the only men who were "brought to the chamber" to vote. This is
the foundation, upon which was built that part of the charge laid at
the door of the legislature by Gov. La Follette which relates to the
use of liquor as a corrupting agent on that particular occasion.

This may not be as interesting a story of the all night, session of
March 19, 1901, as the one told by the La Pollette press bureau
later, but it has the advantage of being literally true and tincolored.
What it lacks in sensationalism, in picturesqueness, in dramatic
force, it makes up in veracity and harmony with the facts.

When morning came the administration forces had secured
enough votes to order the bill to engrossment and third reading
and they raised the call by a vote of 52 to 45. The previous ques-
tion was ordered by a vote of 56 to 41 and the bill was ordered to a
third reading by the same vote. It is manifest that some of the
men who favored the passage of the bill — or at least voted for it
when it came up — aided in preventing the call from being raised.
There was no debate on the measure.

An analysis of the vote by which the primary election bill was
ordered to a third reading discloses the fact that — to adopt the
terms that later came into use to designate the factions — of the 56
votes for the measure 13 were cast by stalwarts, 3 by democrats and
41 by half breeds. Of the 41 votes against the measure, 26 were
cast by stalwarts and 15 by democrats.

When the vote on the final passage of the measure was taken
three days later, but 9 stalwarts voted in the affirmative while 31
voted against it. ' Of the democrats 2 voted for and 16 against the
bill. Forty-one half breeds, all there were in the assembly, voted
in the affirmative. Had it not been for men who later became stal-
warts, the primary election bill would have failed in the assembly.

The vote by which the bill was ordered to engrossment and third
reading was as follows : (Assembly Journal, page 589).

Ayes. Messrs. Ainsworth, Anderson, Andrew, Babb, Brunson,

Cady Clark, Coapman, Cook, Dahl, Duerrwaechter, Erickson, David
Evan's.Jr., Fenlon, Frost, Galaway, Gilman, Haggerty, Hall, Hanson,
Henry Hodgins, Holland, F. Johnson, H. Johnson, Jones, Krumrey,
Lane 'Lenroot, McCormlck, McGlll, McMillan, Manuel, Middleton,
Overbeck, Park, Price, Rankl, Roe, Rogers, Root, Rossman, Sarau,
Silkworth, Smalley, Steiger, Stevens, Sturdevant, Swenhold, Thomas,
Valentine, Whitson, WlUott, Young, Zinn, and Mr. Speaker.— 56.

Noes. — Messrs. Barker, Barlow, Benson, Burdeau, Cleophas, Col-
lins, Dodge, Dow, Eager, Ela, Eline, Evan W. Evans, Fessenfeld,
Flaherty Gagnon, Gawin, Hartung, Jenson, Johnston, Karel, -Katz,
Keene, Kern, McCabe, McComb, Maloney, E. A. Miller, Minor, Norton,
Orton,' Owen, Pomrening, Rasmussen, Schellenburg, Slade, Smith,
Soltwedel, Spratt, Thiessenhausen, E. A. Williams, and J. C. Wil-
liams. — 41. „ „ ,^.„ , ,, ,

Absent or not voting. — Messrs. Esau, Herman Miller, and Mol-

denhauer. — 3.

46 Political Refoem in Wisconsin.

CHAPTER X.
The Primary Bill in the Senate.

When the state senate convened in January, 1901, seventeen of
the thirty-one republicans in that body were known to be adminis-
tration men. They were: Senators Anson, Bissell, Bums, Fearne,
Hatton, Knudson, Kreutzer, McGillivray, Martin, Miller, Mills,
Munson, O'Niel, Riordan, Stebbins, Stout and Wolff. Senators
Whitehead and Eoehr already had made records as "progressives"
that would have led any forecaster who judged by past performances
— to use a sporting term — to place them.in the same ranks. Senators
Gaveney and Mosher, both new members, were progressives also and
would, under normal conditions, liave acted with the administra-
tion. Of the remaining ten republicans in that body there
was not one who would have made a fight against a reasonable pri-
mary bill had one been proposed at the beginning and had the meth-
ods used to promote it been such as would command the respect of
a legislator who does his own thinking. Their names were : Sen-
ators Green, Devoes, Eaton, Hagemeister, Harris, Jones, Mc-
Donough, Reynolds, Morse and Willy. . Senators Jacobs and Weed
were the democratic members of that house.

From this analysis it is clear that at the outset twenty-one mem-
bers of the state senate were what may be called "progressives" and
were inclined to favor and support a primary bill that would redeem
the platform pledge to the fullest extent consistent with safety and
sound judgement. For four years Senator Whitehead had led the
fight for taxation reforms and aided in the enactment of other pro-
gressive legislation which will be mentioned at length rmder its ap-
propriate headings. Senator Eoehr had made a record on insur-
ance and taxation legislation as well as in the perfection of the
Milwaukee primary law. Both of these senators, together with
Judge Orton and others in the assembly, had even been a>ccused of
radicalism, and some of their acts had been criticized as altogether
'too advanced and tending to approach the danger line.

Yet the conditions that developed during the first six weeks of
the legislative session of 1901, already briefly outlined, made it im-
possible for them to co-operate with the administration that was
driving the new red wagon of progress. They were willing to go
forward, but they did not believe in trying to reach the end of the
journey at one leap. They were willing to experiment with a pri-
mary law, but they wanted a law that would not wreck political
parties and put a premium on personal politics and the organiza-
tion of personal machines.

As has been explained, three of the original La Follette men
were expelled from the ranks for insubordination and conduct un-
becoming soldiers in the administration army— O'Neil, Kreutzer,

The Evolution and REyoLUTioN of the Pbimaky. 47

and Riordan. The four progressives who were disposed at first to
act with the administiation, Whitehead, Roehr, Gaveney, and
Mosher, were early given to understand that independence of opin-
ion would not be tolerated and they, too, were literally driven into
the opposition camp. Senator Bissell was converted to opposition
to the primary law by the arguments before the committee. The
conservatives naturally fell in with the men who had been ejected
from the administration faction and those who had been refused
admittance because they could not present proper credentials, and
the stalwart faction in the senate was thus made up. Eightegji
stalwart votes, to which were added those of the two democrats in
the senate, were counted against the primary bill when it came up
in that body on April 11.

In order to establish a point of concentration for the opposition
forces, Senators Hagemeister and Kreutzer each introduced a bill
as a substitute for the original primary bill No. 73S, introduced -
by Senator Miller. These measures were introduced on April 9,
two days before the original primary bill came up for consideration,
and were placed in the files as substitutes JSTo. 1 and 2, respectively.
Senator Hagemeister's bill provided for the nomination of candi-
dates for county officers only, while the one introduced by Senator
Kreutzer provided for the election of delegates to all conventions,
as well as the nomination of county officers, at the primary election.
The first was a crudely drawn, brief measure that could not have
been made effective had it been enacted into law; the second was
more carefully prepared, and, had it passed, would have given an
opportunity to fairly test the primary election plan under condi-
tions favorable to success. Senator Kreutzer had taken many of
the best features from the Milwaukee caucus law and incorporated
them into his bill. Other features that would have added to its
strength were omitted, but, on the whole, it was a measure worthy
of consideration.

When the vote was taken and the original primary bill was de-
feated, 20 to 13, offers on the part of the administration senators
of compromise measures were made, one after another, in rapid
succession, but they were rejected. The Hagemeister bill was put
forward by the stalwarts and Senator Hatton offered an amend-
ment providing for the nomination of candidates for county officers
and for the legislature by direct vote. Senator Miller offered the
original primary bill, with a referendum clause. Senator Mc-
Gillivray offered an amendment in the form of a substitute which
provided for placing the names of candidates on the primary ballot
by caucuses and conventions. All were voted down without
hesitation.

Senator Kreutzer then withdrew his proposed measure and
offered an amendment to the Hagemeister bill in the form of a
referendum clause submitting it to a vote of the people, which was

48 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

carried. The Hagemeister bill was then passed by a vote of 30
to 13.

Where the administration made its mistake was in meeting all
early suggestibns of compromise with the statement that no ma-
terial alteration or amendment to the original bill would be tol-
erated. That is, this was a mistake if the object sought was th«
enactment of a primary law at that session of the legislature. If it
was the governor's purpose to play for position and secure an issue
with which to go into the next Campaign, the record is clear and no
errors can be detected. It was the most astute political move that
had ever been attempted in Wisconsin and it succeeded. The entire
play was so carefully planned, so cleverly executed, and so cun-
ningly used in the subsequent campaign that it cannot fail to excite
the wondering admiration of the ordinary citizen who lacks genius
in political manipulation but who approves of success at any cost
and by any methods.

An excuse for rejecting the proposed amendments and modifi-
cations was found in the fact that they were not in absolute har-
mony with the platform pledge of the republican party. No meas-
ure less radical and revolutionary than the one proposed by the
administration would redeem that pledge. But it must be remem-
bered that the platform itself was the work of the same men — or
man — who proposed to redeem it by the passage of the administra-
tion bill. Those who opposed the radical planlc in the platform
had not been given an opportunity to vote against it, but that did
not count. The plank was in the platform and it stands today as
the officially recorded expression of a republican state convention.

The stalwarts made a political mistake when they failed to pass
an effective, workable substitute for the administration primary
bill. The Hagemeister substitute was not such a measure. Experi-
ence in Milwaukee county and some of the larger cities of the state
was entirely ignored when that bill was drawn and it was, therefore,
a step backward in the evolution of the primary. Had they accepted
the substitute offered by Senator Hatton when the Hagemeister
bill was pending they would have "played politics" to some effect
and in all probability saved the state from the experiences under
the present primary law. But they were not in a frame of mind to
compromise. The contest had been forced by the administration.
Both sides were stripped and gloved for a finish fight; nothing
short of a knockout would satisfy either.

Gov. La Follette was justified in vetoing the Hagemeister bill.
He was not justified in sending to the senate an insult in the form
of a message. That message, now printed in the official journal of
the senate as a permanent record, is a stump speech intended for
use in political campaigns and was unworthy of a governor who was
addressing representatives of the people. There had been a differ-
ence of opinion between the senate and the governor, between the

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimaey. 49

legislative and executive departments, and that difference was upon
a subject of legislation. The governor had a right to object to and
veto a bill passed by the two houses; he had no right to scold like
a fishwife because another bill, which he favored, was not enacted
into law. It is not surprising, therefore, that the senate, in a reso-
lution introduced by Senator Eoehr, after quoting from the mes-
sage some of the most violently abusive and demonstrably untruth-
ful paragraphs, wrote into the official records the following pro-
test against the outrage :

"This message, containing these statements, appears at large
upon pages 1026 to 1035 of the journal of the senate. We therefore
claim our privilege as senators to have it appear upon the record of
our proceedings that we do not allow these statements of the gov-
ernor to pass unchallenged, and that upon any view of his consti-
tutional prerogative we deny that he is justified in thus addressing
the legislature. We hold that 'no sense of obligation' on the part
of the governor can excuse such grave reflections upon the mem-
bers of the legislature as are contained in the portions of the mes-
sage above quoted.

"We recognize the constitutional right of the governor freely to
express his views upon the policy and validity of any legislation
submitted to him for his approval but we hold that the use of such
expressions as are above specifically referred to, transcend all
bounds of official propriety and constitutional right.

"We protest, therefore, most earnestly as members of the legis-
lature against the aspersions cast upon our official acts, upon our
personal motives, and upon our private characters by the governor
in his message to the legislature."

It was just such emergencies as this that President George
Washington had in mind when he wrote the paragraph quoted
below into- his farewell address. At the close of his official career,
after an experience of two terms in the office of chief executive of
a nation of self governing people, the first president saw clearly
to what length the lust of power would at times lead ambitious
men, and he pointed out the necessity of keeping all public officers
strictly within constitutional bounds. His words were not written
to apply to a special case. They were a general statement of a
principle of government that must he observed if this nation is
to remain free and independent. He said :

"It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free
country should inspire caution in those intrusted with the admin-
istration to confine themselves within their respective constitutional
spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to
encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to con-
solidate the powers of all departments in one, and thus to create,
whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just esti-
mate of that love of power and proneness to abuse it which pre-
dominates in the human heart is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth
of this position. The necessity ot reciprocal checks in the exercise
of political power, by dividing it and distributing it into different
depositories, and constituting each the guardian of the public vreaj
against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments
ancient and modern, some of them in our country and under our

50 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute
them. If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modifica-
tion of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it
be corrected by an amendment in the way which the constitution
designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though
this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the custom-
ary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The pre-
cedent must always greatly over-balance in permanent evil any par-
tial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield."

That Gov. La Follette did not succeed in usurping the powers
and constitutional prerogatives of the legislature was not his
fault. The senate refused to permit him to dictate its action as a
legislative hody. The result was that, angered at the denial of
despotic power which he craved, he wrote the message against
which the senate placed upon record an official protest.

After the adjoyrnment of the legislature the administration
faction issued a "voters' handbook," in which it was charged that
all offers to compromise had been rejected by the senate. This is
true. It is also true that all previous oflEers to compromise had
been rejected by the executive. The only difference was that the
stalwarts, in their innocence and unskilled in shrewd political
games of cunning and finesse, failed to put their offers of com-
promise on record by introducing bills.

It was at this point that the stalwarts were outgeneraled.
They considered only the business before them and failed to make
a record of their position to be used in their ' defense before the
people in the campaign that followed. They were, most of them,
experienced legislators, but they were not masters of the political
game. Furthermore, they regarded Gov. La Follette as a repub-
lican and did not foresee the bitter fight within the party that was
to follow. La Follette had the advantage as he no doubt had his
course mapped out at that time.

The stalwarts proposed one amendment after another, but
they did not make an official record of that fact. The administra-
tion men, on the other hand, when they found their bill was
doomed and knowing that, in their present state of exasperation,
the stalwarts would not consent to forego the advantage of sup-
erior numbers and permit the radicals to pass even a compromise
bill, went after a record and they got it. They introduced amend-
ment after amendment _only to see them defeated — they were in-
troduced for the purpose of having them defeated. They had no
intention of passing them. They did not wish to pass them.
Their record play was made in one evening after the close of the
debate in which the only question discussed was the one of passing
the original assembly bill.

The Evolution and Revoi-ution of the Primary. 51

CHAPTER XI.
The Wisconsin Eepublican League.

As this is a history of the primary election movement in Wis-
consin it is unnecessary to go into details with respect to all of the
incidents that punctuated the political feud born in the opening
months of Gov. La, Follette's first administration and continuing
with increasing bitterness for four years. But, whatever the real
cause of the feud may have been, the defeat of the administration
primary bill by the state senate was the excuse publicly put forth
in justification of the declaration of war by Gov. La Follette him-
self. There is reason to believe another issue would have been
made to serve the purpose had this one failed, for there are ambi-
tious men who can thrive only through agitation. But the pri-
mary bill had been defeated and it was therefore made the issue to
the defense of which the personal admirers of the governor could
be rallied. It was a providential bone of contention that would
furnish an opportunity for just the kind of a fight most desired by
the Wisconsin Napoleon of polities.

The record of that political contest is one of v^rhich Wisconsin
men have no occasion to be proud — and the end is not yet. It is
a record of passion and prejudice; a record of intense bitterness;
a record of persecution and reprisal, of wrong and retaliation; a
record of broken friendships and the birth of lasting enmities; a
record of "malice, hatred and all uneharitableness." Eeputable,
clean business- and professional men were arraigned before the bar
of public opinion, tried, and unjustly convicted, without a hear-
ing, of all manner of offenses against the common good. Private
citizens who cherished no political ambitions were assumed to have
committed the most serious political crimes and the assumption
was accepted as conclusive evidence of their guilt.

The rule that "every seed shall bring forth fruit after its kind"
is a universal law, as certain and immutable in its operations in
the mental as in the physical realm. Where malice is planted
malice will spring up and bear frnit after its kind. Suspicion,
distrust, falsehood, injustice, all germinate and grow like rank
weeds in the human soul and choke out the beneficent and nobler
promptings of friendship based on mutual confidence, esteem and
brotherly love.

The pernicious seeds of political and social discord were scat-
tered broadcast throughout the state, and, be it said to our shame,
there were so many citizens who were prepared to believe the worst
that -could be said about their fellows that the crop harvested was
a bountiful one. Neighbor was arrayed against neighbor and
brother against brother; social circles were divided and the influ-
ence of the controversy in some instances invaded the, sacred places

53 Political Eetoem in Wisconsin.

and church congregations were in a measure affected by it. The
old good natured rivalry that had characterized contests between
the republican and democratic parties became a memory, for demo-
crats trespassed upon republican ground and took a hand in the
factional fight, the social democrats standing back meanwhile and
vociferously applauding every abusive epithet hurled by either
faction at the other.

Of a truth, Wisconsin cut a sorry figure before high heaven and
in the face of the peoples of the earth in the year 1902.

After the adjournment of the legislature steps were taken to
organize in an effective manner the members who were opj)osed to
the methods and policies of the administration. Eighteen senators
and forty-one members of the assembly joined in this movement.
Of the eighteen senators, all had voted against the administration
primary election bill. Of the forty-one assemblymen, twenty-
eight had voted against the bill when it came up for engrossment
and third reading and thirteen had voted for it. The thirteen
were Speaker George H. Ray, and Assemblymen Frost, Hanson,
Jones, Lane, Eossman, Willott, Young, Duerrwachter, Haggerty,
F. Johnson, Park, Silkworth. Eight of these assemblymen also
voted for the bill when it came up for final passage in the assembly.
They were: Speaker Ray, and Messrs. Frost, Hanson, Jones,
Lane, Rossman, Willott, and Young.

As an explanation of the reasons that inspired them to organize
a league, these members of the legislature issued a public state-
ment, called by the administration newspapers a "manifesto," in
which they set forth plainly the principles for which it was their
purpose to contend as an organization. Unlike most public docu-
ments of the kind this statement is not too long for reproduction
and it is here given in full together with the names of all the
signers as they appeared in the columns of The Sentinel on Aug.
18, 1901.

"To the Republicans of Wisconsin:

"The undersigned, republican members of the legislature of
1901, are convinced that the republican party of Wisconsin is upon
the verge of a crisis which cap only be averted by organized effort
on the part of all republicans .who consider party welfare above
personal ambition.

"As representatives of the people, we view with alarm the
persistent effort to strengthen the executive at the expense of the
legislative department of the state.

"The constitution says: 'The legislative power shall be vested
in the senate and assembly.' The perpetuity of our institutions de-
pends upon the independence and integrity of each of the co-
ordinate branches of our government. Neither is responsible to the
other, but each is responsible to the people. Neither should submit
to dictation from the other. Any attempt to subordinate the legisla-
tive department to the control of the executive is revolutionary and
deserves prompt and emphatic rebuke.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaey. 53

"The public Interest demands that among the several depart-
ments of government there be cordial and courteous co-operation.

"These propositions are so fundamental that they are more vital
than party success itself.

"Many unwarrantable Interferences with the exclusive powers
of the legislature and attempts to coerce acquiescence in unreason-
able acts and unwise experiments at the last session were contrary
to the welfare of the people of Wisconsin, and created bitter fac-
tional differences in the republican party.

"The party must not permit itself to be divided, and possibly
destroyed by factional disputes. Its purposes are too high, its work
too important, to be dominated for personal ends.

"For these reasons we present to you the necessity of a whole-
some organization, which shall truly represent the whole'party and
safeguard its principles. We have not in contemplation an organ-
ization for a single campaign, but one that shall be permanent and
as comprehensive as the party it represents.

"In furtherance of such an organization, rooms have been
leased on the eleventh floor of the Herman building, in Milwaukee,
where all republicans will- be welcome, and where opportunity will
be afforded to enroll in- the Wisconsin Republican league."

In the light of subsequent events this statement of principles
reads like a prophecy. The league failed in its mission and the
party it was designed to save from disruption was disorganized.
It is surprising that so temperate a statement of important, not to
say fundamental, truths should excite such violent antagonism, but
the fact that the organized members who put forth this statement
of principles were variously designated as "the Bolters' league,"
"the Eleventh Story league," the "platform repudiators," the "cor-
porationists," the "corruptionists," and were given other and kind-
red titles of reproach, was not calculated to restore a cordial,
friendly understanding between the wings of the party.

In view of the fact that the people of Wisconsin have for four
years lived amid the alleged blessings that are inseparable from the
primary election plan in full and complete operation, the men who
signed a statement in which that system of making nominations
was described as an "unreasonable and unwise experiment" are
entitled to have their names printed with the statement. Nor will
they object to have the people of the state reminded that they fav-
ored a modified form of the law in 1901. In order that the history
of the movement may be made complete the names of the signers
are here given :

Senators.-^W. H. Bissell, Lodi; William H. Devos, Milwaukee;
Barney A. Eaton, Milwaukee; John C. Gavenes, Arcadia; J. Herbert
Green, Milwaukee; Henry Hagemeister, Green Bay; John Harris,
Elkhorn; A. M. Jones, Waukesha; A. L. Kreutzer, Wausau; Frank
McDonough, Eau Claire; Elmer D. Morse, Princeton; O. W. Mosher,
New Richmond; William O'Neil, Washburn; John P. Reynolds,
Genoa Junction; D. B. Riordan, Eagle River; Julius E. Roehr, Mil-
waukee; John M. Whitehead, Janesville; Albert T. Willy, Appleton;

Assemblymen. — Charles Barker, Milwaukee; John M. Barlow,
New Lisbon; Willard E. Burdeau, Flintville"; H. Cleopas, Beloit;

54 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

A. Clark Dodge, Monroe; Everett E. Dow, La Grange; P. G. Duerr-
wachter. South German town; Almeron Eager, EvansvUle; George
Ela, Rochester; Fred J. Frost, Almond; John A. Haggerty, Perry-
ville; Andrew C. Hansen, Mindora; Fred Hartung, Wauwatosa;
Andrew Jensen, New London; Franklin Johnson, Baraboo; James
Johnston, Mukwonago; Evan R. Jones, Sparta; Francis B. Keerie,
Milwaukee; Nathan E. Lane, Phillips; Joseph Maloney, Bloomer;
Edwin A. Miller, Hixon; Herman Miller, Wausau; Levi A. Miner,
South Milwaukee; John E. Norton, Milwaukee; Philo A. Orton, Dar-
lington; John W. Owen, Racine; Harry J. Park, Spring Valley;
Herman Pomrening, Milwaukee; K. E. Rasmussen, Rice Lake;
George H. Ray, La Crosse; George P. Rossman, Ashland; Charles A.
Silkworth, Osseo; Dwight S. Slade, Slades Corners; Albert E. Smith,
Delevan; Henry J. Soltwedel, Milwaukee; George Spratt, Sheboygan
Falls; R. F. Thiessenhusen, Milwaukee; Edwin A. Williams,
Neenah; Joseph Willott, Jr., Manitowoc; John H. Young, Eau
Claire.

In the legislature of 1901 there were thirty-one republican
senators and eighty-one republican members of the assembly.
Two senators died before the organization of the league — Senators
Stebbins and Fearne — leaving but twenty-nine republican senators
in August, 1901. The names of eighteen of the twenty-nine mem-
bers of the upper house appear on the membership roll of the
league, and forty-one of the eight-one members of the lower house
also signed the roll. The membership of the new organization
thus embraced a majority of the republicans in each house and a
majority of the entire republican membership of the legislature
had they met in joint session.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Peimaby. 55

CHAPTER XII.

The Campaign That Followed.

The campaign conducted by both factions during the fifteen
months following the publication of the league statement was a
lively one, but it is not one that can be pointed to with pride even
by those who triumphed at the polls. Whatever experience the
members of the league had gained in past campaigns was used for
the purpose of perfecting a statewide organization. The term
"perfecting" is employed in this instance from force of habit, but
the literal definition of the word does not accurately describe the
organization of the Wisconsin Eepublican league. Still, it would
have served the purpose had there not been another political organ-
ization in existence that year. Gov. La Toilette had "perfected"
his political machine and he gave a new meaning, a new, interpreta-
tion to the word in Wisconsin. The league had members in every
county; Gov. La Follette had workers in every voting precinct.
The league started out to make a poll of the state ; Gov. La Follette
already had a most complete poll and mailing list when he was in-
augurated and he had improved it from month to month. The
league succeeded in securing a reasonably complete poll of eleven
^counties and a partial list of voters in about half of the remaining
counties ; Gov. La Follette not only had his list of republican voters
in every precinct of the state, but he also had in his possession the
names of thousands of Bryan democrats who were classed by him
under the heading "fair minded," and regularly supplied with
literature.

The contest was in fact between the executive and legislative
departments of the state government. The question at issue was
whether the executive should be permitted to dictate the form and
substance of legislative enactments. Stripped of all superfiuous
and bewildering generalities as well as personalities, this was all
there was to fight about. The governor had a reform program
which it was his purpose to see established in Wisconsin and this
program included the enactment of certain laws into which must
be incorporated certain well defined provisions about which he had
been talking for years. The legislature declined to accept the
governor's program without modification. The executive insisted ;
the legislature stood firm upon its constitutional right to determine
for itself what laws shall be enacted. The executive accused the
legislature of the grave ofEense of repudiating a plank in the plat-
form he had himself dictated; the legislature replied that the
executive was attempting to usurp the functions of the legislative
branch of the government.

But, while this issue was not lost sight of in the campaign, the
great mass of the voters of the state were bewildered by the flood

56 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

of argument and the tidal wave or personalities that attended upon
the campaign as it progressed. It was specifically charged by the
administration faction that the stalwarts represented "special in-
terests" as opposed to a great reform movement; that "organized
greed" was arrayed to defeat the purposes of a highly virtuous and
wholly unselfish band of patriots whose sole aim was to serve the
people intelligently and faithfully. It was even asserted that the
contest was between "the people" on one side and "the machine"
on the other.

As the split in the party had been caused by the primary election
dispute — or, to be more exact, Gov. La Follette had used that issue
as an excuse for perfecting a personal organization — the primary
election proposition was naturally one of the most important mat-
ters discussed in the campaign. Isaac Stephenson, one of GoY. La
Follette's backers, now junior United States senator, had gener-
ously Joined with other enthusiastic members of the administra-
tion faction and supplied enough money to establish the Free
Press. The columns of that paper were used to defend the gover-
nor's policies, while The Sentinel was employed to defend the Wis-
consin Eepublican league. But neither paper devoted all of its
time to the defensive side of the campaign. Both took the oflEen-
sive on occasions. It may be explained here that the word "offen-
sive" is used in this connection in the fullest acceptation of the
term.

In carrying out the work of the league, of which W. H. Bissell
had been made chairman and Col. Dan B. Starkey secretary, a
large amount of literature was prepared and distributed. The
country press was appealed to and many of the local papers
throughout the state accepted and ^printed articles prepared by the
secretary of the league and his assistants. Letters were written
by voluntary contributors and printed in The Sentinel .and other
papers; thousands of circulars were prepared and distributed
through the mails. As the campaign warmed up discussions were
common on the streets and in public places generally in which the
primary election plan was not the least interesting subject of de-
bate.

At the same time the campaign of the administration faction
was going forward apace and the same methods were used as were
employed by the league. Wherever a country newspaper could
be induced to aid the "cause" it was employed and praised for its
disinterested service to the governor and his reform campaign. The
The Free Press matched The Sentinel column for column, editorial
for editorial, and letter for letter. In point of fact, a careful ex-
amination of the files will show that The Sentinel fell behind in
the race if the total amount of space devoted to factional politics
— for state politics had given place to factional politics for the time
being — were measured.

The Evolution and Revoilution of the Primaey. 57

The arguments for and against the primary election law pro-
posed by Gov. La Follette can not be reproduced here at length, nor
is it necessary to attempt to do so. The points urged by the
friends and opponents of the measure are all that is necessary for
the student of this time to weigh the comparative merits of the two
sides to the controversy. One of the peculiar features of the cam-
paign, however, should be mentioned. The administration fac-
tion insisted that their bill, proposing as it did an entirely new
system of making nominations, must not be classed as an experi-
ment. It must be accepted as sound in principle and any doubt
as to its success in practical operation was sternly forbidden. Gov.
La Follette himself gave expression to this view in his message
vetoing the Hagemeister bill when he said: "The general pur-
pose of the measure, the plain meaning .of its provisions, THE
CEETAIN EFFECT OF THE LAW IN OPEBATION", the
necessary and reasonable expense, each and all furnished theme for
persistent falsification and malicious assault."

A careful reading of the literature of the period, consisting of
editorials, nevi^s reports, letters from private citizens to the press,
and pamphlets and circulars that have been preserved in private
collections, disclosed the following specific points urged by the two
parties to the controversy in explanation of their support of or op-
position to the proposed law :

FOE THE AFFIEMATIVE.

1. The republican platform of 1900 distinctly and unequivocal-
ly demanded that all caucuses and conventions should be abolished
and all candidates for office should be nominated by a direct vote.

2. "For many years the evils of the caucus and convention
system have multiplied and baffled all attempts at legislative con-
trol or correction." The delegate elected at caucuses to represent
the voter "too frequently has his own interests at heart * * *
and serves his own purposes."

3. The right to vote for candidates of the party includes the
right to select those candidates. The member of a party has
a right to participate in the making of the party ballot.

4. The convention system of making nominations offered an
opportunity which was seized upon by "men possessed of the talent
of combination, manipulation, and political management," and the
political machine was thus established in power.

5. The officials nominated by the machine became the servants
of the machine and surrendered their judgments to its will.

6. Even at best, were the conventions to be entirely free from
machine rule, they are not deliberative bodies and their work is
usually done under conditions where "noisy enthusiasm outweighs
the strongest argument."

7. The people "know enough to nominate their own candidates
for oflBce without the, aid or dictation of bosses, caucuses and con-
vention manipulators, and political machines."

8. "The people now elect their officers by use of the Australian
ballot. In the primary election they would nominate their candi-
dates for office by use of the same Australian ballot."

9. "When candidates are chosen by a direct vote, a coterie of

58 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

Milwaukee professional politicians can no longer hold the state in
the hollow of their hands and dictate nominations to the people."

10. The primary election question has been before the people
of the state a sufficient time to enable them to understand it and
it was "overwhelmingly approved by the voters because they were
everywhere ready for it."

11. Direct nominations under a primary election means direct
responsibility to the people.

12. "Nothing is expensive that gives good government. Noth-
ing so expensive as poor govei'nm^nt. One set of inefficient or
dishonest officials will waste more than many primary elections will
cost."

13. The primary election bill was defeated by "a systematic
campaign of misrepresentation. The general purpose of the mea-
sure, the plain meaning of its provisions, the certain effect of the
law in operation, the necessary and reasonable expense, each and
all furnished theme for persistent falsification and malicious as-
sault."

FOB THE NEGATIVE.

1. The administration primary bill would have disorganized
parties and built up personal machines.

2. In the form presented to the legislature it was unconstitu-
tional. (This objection was urged by Senator Whitehead, but the
test never has been made in the courts).

^ 3. The development of personal machines would lead to the
lavish use of money in campaigns and corruption would follow as a
necessary and natural consequence.

4. It would make office seeking a profession in which ex-
perience would be of great advantage to the candidate.

5. The necessity of circulating petitions would furnish ad-
ditional occupation and open a new avenue of profit to the political
mercenaries.

6. The poor man would be restrained by his poverty and the
modest man by his modesty from becoming candidates for nomi-
nations, even though they be well equipped to perform the duties
of office.

7. Public servants would be in danger of being dragged, will-
ingly or unwillingly, into the ruck of political activity, as they
would constitute a ready made machine that could be used with
almost irresistable effect in a primary campaign and the temptation
to use them would be more than the average state administration
could resist.

8. The system would give to the cities an undue influence In
making up the party ticket because the primaries would occur at a
time when the farmers would be busy and not disposed to attend.
By falling to attend the primaries the farmers would lose all voice
in the selection of candidates.

9. The organization of party committees for service at the pri-
maries would furnish another machine, with ramifications in every
voting precinct, and the possession of a list of these committeemen
would inure to the advantage of the candidate favored by the state
committee chairman. While under the old system party committee-
men were expected to aid in the election of the party ticket only,
in the primary election campaign and at the primary election itself
the same officers would have no party interest to serve, the in-
terests of the individual candidates for nominations being para-
mount.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimaby. 59

10. The holding of primary elections would entail a large ex-
pense upon the taxpayers without any corresponding benefit.

11. If all conventions were abolished no means would be pro-
vided for the members of the party to make its platforms, that
duty — and privilege — devolving on the candidates whose aim would
be to get elected without regard to the principles in which the
members of the party believed.

12. The voters would be required to select candidates from a
list of names of men of whom, in many cases, they would have but
slight knowledge, and some of whom they would not know even
by reputation, and upon whose qualifications and fitness for office
they could not, in the nature of things, pass intelligent judgment.

13. That party conventions, county, district and state, were
the forums in which questions of policy were debated and decided,
and as such they had an educative value.

14. A nomination at a primary would almost invariably be a
minority nomination and would not, therefore, represent the will
of a majority of the party.

15. Under the system proposed there was no way of restraining
the members of one party from participating in the primaries, and
aiding in the nominations of the candidates, of another party, there-
by defeating the will of the majority — or even a predominant mi-
nority — of the party whose primary is invaded.

16. That where democrats participate in the nomination of
republican candidates and republicans in the nominations of demo-
cratic candidates, which invariably would occur when one party had
a safe and sure majority in a district, state or city, parties could not
be held responsible for the official acts of public officers.

17. That party organizations, and, at the same time, party
responsibility, were subordinated by the primary election plan to
the personal interests of ambitious' men with sufficient money or
with personal organizations large enough to promise success. The
party would have no way of protecting itself from any man who
might contend for one of its nominations at the primary, making
use of members of other parties to swell his vote.

18. That the primary election system of nominating candidates
was a departure from the principles of representative government
and was, therefore, not a "progressive movement," but a backward
step.

19. The American system of government by parties was the
only one under which a great republic with nearly a hundred mil-
lions of people could be wisely and safely governed, as parties could
be held responsible for the acts of their representatives. When ad-
ministrations failed or public servants were delinquent or false to
their trust, the party they represented could be punished at the
polls, as frequently had been done in the past.

20. The proposed law was at best an experiment, and it would
be unwise to abandon entirely the old system until a trial could be
made to ascertain- from actual experience to what extent the new
plan could be made safe, convenient and workable.

21. That where experiments had been tried with the primary
election system the results had not been so uniformly satisfactory
as to justify an unqualified indorsement of the plan.

22. That Wisconsin had never been a "boss ridden" state, as
charged, and that there was no crying need of a radical, revolution-
ary movement for the banishment of a purely imaginary evil.

23. That the list of distinguished citizens who had served the
state in congress, in cabinet positions, and in executive, administra-

60 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

tive, and legislative oifices was a sufficient answer to the charge that
"specal interests" ruled Wisconsin and that a sweeping reform was
needed in the method of selecting candidates for office.

State Senator John M. Whitehead of Janesville became the
stalwart candidate for the republican nomination for governor in
opposition of Gov. La Follette. He did not seek the honor. On
the contrary, for some weeks he resolutely refused to enter the race.
He had already served one term in the state senate and had been
re-elected in 1900. As a member of that body he had taken part in
the movement that resulted in the establishment of the permanent
state taz commission. The work in the senate was congenial to
him. He was in thorough sympathy with the members of the tax
commission in their desire to solve the vexing problems assigned to
them and believed it was his duty to stay in the legislature where
there was work to do in which he felt a lively interest and for
which experience and study had qualified him.

But hJs fellow members of the league thought differently. They
had been and were being represented as corruptionists, the poli-
tical agents of "special interests," the corrupt tools and associates
of corporations. They believed they could win the election and
disprove the accusations by presenting as their candidate a man of
tried and proved ability and integrity, one whose public and pri-
vate character would bear the closest scrutiny ; a man who could not
be bought or intimidated; one who was not a politician in the or-
dinary acceptation of that term, and whose sole aim was to give his
constituents the best service of which he was capable in return for
the honor conferred on him; one who would not attempt to boss
others and who could not be bossed. It was these considerations
that induced the league membership to urge upon Senator White-
head that he consent to become their candidate to contest the nom-
ination with Gov. La Follette, and in the end they prevailed.

As an aid to the campaign of the league Senator Whitehead
wrote a series of letters that were first printed in The Sentinel
and then published in supplement form for use by the state press.
In the opening series of these letters the primary election plan, as
embodied in the adminstration measure defeated in 1901, was
taken up and discussed at length. Like everything Senator White-
head writes, the letters were entirely free from personalities. They
were characterized by calm, judicial argument, and extended quo-
tations from public records were made to establish the correctness
of his statements and the soundness of his conclusions. As a mat-
ter of fact, the quotations were so long and the arguments so close
and analytical that the letters did not make lively reading and,
as a natural consequence, they did not have the effect they should
have had.

In the heat of one of the most whirlwindy of all whirlwind
campaigns, when he found himself being held up to public scorn

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primaey. 61

in the administration newspapers and ridiculed by cartoon in cam-
paign textbooks and elsewhere, when passions were at white heat
and no man who took part in the campaign in any capacity, much
less a candidate, could escape personal abuse, these letters and the
public addresses later delivered by Senator Whitehead were an-
achronisms. But their wholesomeness was beyond dispute. So
far as he was personally concerned, Senator Whitehead conducted
a clean campaign, and history must do him justice for the honor-
able part he played. That the voters appreciate his worth when
they have an opportunity to know him well and judge of him at
first hand, and not through a distorted image portrayed by pre-
judice and passion, is shown by the fact that he is still in the state
senate, having been elected for the fourth time by his constituents
in 1908.

62 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE XIII.
Gov. La Follette Ee-elected.

Gov. La Follette was renominated over the opposition of the
Wisconsin Eepublican league and re-elected in .November. While
the league did not contest his election as'^n organization, it was no
secret that the members bolted in large numbers. In 1900 his
total vote was 264,419, and his net plurality over the democratic
candidate, Louis G. Bomrich, was 103,745. In 1902 his total vote
was 193,417 — a falling off of 71,002 — and his net plurality over
David S. Eose, the democratic candidate, was 47,599. But the
figures showing the shrinkage of the republican vote do not give
a complete understanding of the republican bolt or indicate to
what extent the republican party was divided. Thousands of
democrats who had been "regular" since W. J. Bryan captured the
Chicago convention in 1896 were in full sympathy with Gov. La
Follette and his reforms. They voted for him in companies, bat-
talions, and regiments. They were, interchangeably, Bryan demo-
crats or La Follette republicans, whatever the occasion might call
for.- And their assistance had been industriously solicited.

The plan and method by which the election was attained were
new to Wisconsin politics. There was no precedent in the state
for the perfect organization and efficient discipline that character-
ized the administration machine. With the exception of the cam-
paign two years later, at which time both sides to the controversy
had added to their store of experience in the line of campaign or-
ganization and management, and were more evenly matched in
consequence, it is beyond question that the campaign of 1902 stands
without a parallel in the history of Wisconsin.

The state employes, inclusive of those under the civil serviqe
rule, and large numbers of young men in attendance as students
at the University of Wisconsin, were organized as a working force
in the interests of the administration faction. There were times
when the state house was practically deserted except by a clerical
force employed in folding and mailing campaign literature. Heads
of departments were in the field doing campaign work and they were
accompanied by their clerks and other subordinates. Employes of
state institutions contributed their share to the total amount of po-
litical work done. And in the prosecution of this .campaign party
lines were entirely ignored. Lists of "fair minded" democrats, as
all Bryan democrats were called, were at hand and the campaign
was taken to their doors both by circulars, campaign documents, and
personal solicitation. The result was that Gov. La Follette was
re-elected, notwithstanding a bolt that split the republican party
practically in two.

At this point it is worth while to pause for a glance at one

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaby. 63

feature of the campaign of 1903 that is not altogether sad. There
is a grim humor about the incident, although it was not intended
to excite merriment, that is refreshing, not to say inspiring.

It is a well known fact that Senator John C. Spooner was not a
believer in the primary election plan of abolishing political evils.
He had never been a politician. He had himself remarked to
friends that, should he attempt to organize his own ward for an
election, it would be sure to go democratic. But the people of
Wisconsin had counted him as a statesman and did not require that
he should develop political cunning and sagacity. They were satis-
fied with him as he was. He had made a record during twelve years
in the upper house of congress that justified his friends in believing
in his understanding of statecraft.

Senator Spooner had written a letter in 1900 in which he
announced that, for private and personal reasons which it was
unnecessary to explain, he would not be a candidate for re-election
in 1903. At no time after giving that letter to the press had he
indicated by written statement or spoken word that he was likely
to reconsider the determination there expressed.

The governor was now in the saddle, absolute/ master of a re-
publican convention in 1902, engineer of the most perfect political
machine ever constructed in a middle western state, if not in the
United States, and full of the arrogance of power. He itched to
take a fall out of Senator Spooner.

The convention adopted a platform in which the following plank
had a conspicuous place.

"We especially commend the ofBeial career of the Hon. John C.
Spooner who, by his notably able, conservative, and patriotic course
■ updn questions of national and international importance, has become a
leader in the United States senate. We again express regret for his
announced determination not to serve the state another term in the
senate, and should he now find it possible to reconsider his decision and
express Ms willingness to stand as a candidate in harmony with the
sentiment and in support of the platform principles here adopted by
Wisconsin republicans in state convention, and for the election of a
legislature favorable to their enactment into law, his decision would
meet with the approval of republicans everywhere, and we pledge him
the enthusiastic support of the party for his re-election to the high
position which he has filled with such distinguished ability and with such
lionor to the state and nation. And in case Senator Spooner shall not
find it possible to again be a candidate for United States Senator, we
demand that all candidates for this position shall indorse the principles
of this platform and favor the election of a legislature pledged to enact
those principles into law." --

The convention then re-adopted the platform of 1900 and spe-
cifically repeated the language of the primary election plank con-
tained therein.

There is no record evidence that Senator Spooner ever made a
pilgrimage to the shrine at Madison or kowtowed to the governor
as a consideration for a re-election to the United States senate. He

64 Political Refoem in Wisconsin.

never promised to be good so far as the public is aware. He never
became a candidate, if a withdrawal of his letter announcing that
he would not stand for re-election was necessary to make him a
candidate. He simply kept silent and when the time came to elect
a senator the honor was tendered to him by the unanimous vote of
all the republicans in the legislature.

Here was an instance where a platform pledge was ignored
without any published protest on the part of the maker. If the
plank quoted means anything, it means that Senator Spooner must
recant, express his sorrow for his failure or refusal to give the
primary election movement aid and . comfort, and get out in the
field and boost it along. The platform said this was the condition
under which he would be spared. And yet Senator Spooner, who
uever even made a pretense of seeking harmony; who never, either
publicly or privately, gave the proposed law his indorsement; who
never even "passed the time of day" with the governor ; who was -
not a candidate for re-election, was unanimously chosen to be his
own successor under conditions that made it impossible for him to
decline.

The only explanation of the incident is that at the time the con-
vention was held. Gov. La Follette overestimated his strength, and
that he later discovered he had undertaken a task he could not -
perform. The contract was too big for him. But one thing he
did do: He gave a convincing illustration of a "boss ruled con-
vention," an unusual thing in Wisconsin prior to 1900,

XHE JHJVOLUTION AND KEVOLUTION OP THE PRIMARY. 65

CHAPTEE XIV.
The Primary Bill in 1903.

When the legislature convened in January, 1903, Gov. La Follette
had an overwhelming majority in the assembly, but he had failed
to secure a majority of the senate, although he did succeed in
electing ten of the eighteen new members of that body, E. Eeukema
having been chosen by the voters of the Poiuteenth district, Mil-
waukee, to succeed William H. Devos, resigned to accept the post
of collector of the port of Milwaukee.

The newly elected administration members of the senate were :
H. C. Martin, W. H. Hatton, James H. Stout, and James J.
McGillivray, all re-elected; H. P. Bird, B. Eeukema, H. C. Wipper-
man, George B. Hudnall, Christian Sarau, and George Wylie. Ernst-
Merton of Waukesha, a. democrat who had been elected to succeed
Senator A. M. Jones, was counted among the administration sup-
porters, as he generally voted for administration measures during
the session. The hold-over administration senators were: E. E.
Burns, George W. Wolff, George P. Miller, and Oliver G. Munson.

There were eleven hold-over senators who were members of the
Wisconsin republican league, as follows: Henry Hagemeister, J.
H. Green, Julius E. Eoehr, 0. W. Mosher, William O'Neil, T. A.
Willy, E. D. Morse, John M. Whitehead, Frank MeDonough, D. E.
Eiordan, and John C. Gaveney. Senators A. L. Kreutzer and
Barney A. Baton, both members of the league, were re-elected. Otis
W. Johnson, C. C. Sogers,, and Z. P. Beach were the newly elected
conservative senators. William C. North and Samuel W. Eandolph
were conservative democrats and as a rule acted with the stalwarts
during the session.

The lineup, therefore, was conservative republicans 16, con-
servative democrats 2 ; La Pollette republicans 14, La PoUette demo-
crat 1; conservatives 18, La Pollette supporters 15.

The primary election bill, a substitute for No. 9 7 A, was reported
to the assembly by the committee on privileges and elections on
Feb. 2, and it was passed four days later, Feb. 6, by a vote of 70 to
19. Of the 19 votes against the bill 8 Were cast by republicans and
11 by democrats.

While this may not be record time, still there are few delibera-
tive bodies that can show better speed on so important a measure,
one intended to change the entire system of making nominations of
candidates. Introduced on Monday; passed to engrossment and
third reading on Wednesday; reported correct by both committees
on Thursday and put on the calendar for Friday; passed on Friday
and messaged to the senate the following Monday.

In the meantime, it must be remembered that a number of
amendments were proposed and considered — at least they were re-

66 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

jected. Assemblyman Eay, speaker of the assembly at the previous
session, wanted more time to look into the measure and moved to
make it a special order for Tuesday of the following week, Feb. 11,
but his suggestion was voted down. When the hour came to take up
the bill on Wednesday, Mr. Wallrich made another attempt to
postpone action, but his motion was defeated, 63 to 36. Mr. Wall-
rich, by the way, had been counted among the administration men.

Then came the amendments. Mr. Eay proposed to strike- out
the words "state officers" and "United States senators," but his
motion was defeated, 74 to 21.

Mr. Thompson moved to amend by setting the date of holding
the primary in April, instead of September. Motion defeated by
viva voce vote.

Mr. Crowley offered an amendment in the form of a new section
providing that the voters might write in the names of their choice
for United States senators on a blank line provided for that pur-
pose. Eejected, 65 to 30.

Mr. Coffland then offered an amendment ia the form of a new
section as a substitute for section 32, which amendment provided
for the election at primaries of delegates to attend county con-
ventions at which delegates to state conventions were to be chosen.
The state conventions were to adopt platforms for the state and
congressional districts and to elect party committees. This motion
was lost, no roll call being demanded.

Mr. Karel then offered an amendment making it unlawful for
appointive state, county or city officers to circulate nomination
papers and providing a penalty for violation of this provision. The
prohibition did not apply to officers or employes who circulated
petitions in their own behalf. This amendment was lost by a vote
of 61 to 34.

Mr. Haderer moved to refer the bill back to the committee on
privileges and elections, which motion was defeated by a vote of
68 to 28.

Mr. Haderer moved an amendment in the form of a substitute
bill ; his motion was lost, no roll call being ordered.

Franklin Johnson's motion to refer the bill to the committee on
judiciary was voted down.

Mr. Osbom then moved to amend by providing that state officers
be exempted from the operations of the bill,"which amendment was
lost by a vote of 83 to 12.

The previous question was then moved by Mr. Barker and car-
ried by a unanimous vote, and the bill was ordered to engrossment
and third reading by a vote of 76 to 20.

The following day the bill was reported correct by the two
committees, and on February 6, four days after its introduction by
the committee, it passed the assembly by a vote of 70 to 19.

It is clear from an examination of tlie vote on the several amend-

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimaey. 67

ments that there were a number of members of the lower house
among those who voted for its final passage who believed the meas-
ure could be improved, but the administration organization stood
solidly against any and all changes. It was determined to "put it
up to the senate" in its original form, and there were votes enough
in the house to follow out the administration program to the letter.
The arppeal to the voters against the action of the senate, in 1901 had
succeeded because all the radicals in the state had been united in
a common cause. It was believed that, should the senate repeat its
action of two years before, another appeal could be made with equal
success, and success at the polls was the thing most to be desired.

On February 9 the primary bill was messaged to the senate from
the assembly and referred to the committee on privileges and elec-
tions, consisting of Senators Morse, Miller, Martin, Munson, and
Whitehead, three administration men and two stalwarts. This com-
mittee held tiie measure for consideration from that date until
March &6, on which day they reported it with certain amendments
relating to the publication of notices to be made by county clerks,
the percentage of voters required on nomination papers, and the
notice to be given by the secretary of , state to county clerks.

After the report of the committee had been read. Senator White-
head moved that all rules interfering with the immediate consid-
eration of the bill be suspended, which motion prevailed. Senator
Hatton alone voting in the negative. After several fruitless at-
tempts had been made by Senators Miller and Martin to secure an
adjournment until evening, amendments by individual senators
were presented.

Senator Kreutzer offered an amendment in the form of a substi-
tute — the senate journal does not disclose its nature — ^which was
rejected, only four senators, Hatton, Kreutzer, ISTorth, and Ean-
dolph, voting for it.

Senator Eogers submitted an amendment striking out the mem-
bers of the state legislature from the list of officers to be nominated
at the primary, which was rejected by the entire vote of the senate
with the single exception of Senator Eogers himself.

Senator Gaveney then offered an amendment in the form of a
referendum section which was different from any that previously
had been suggested. He proposed to submit to the voters at the
election to be held in November, 1904, the question of applying the
primary plan to the nomination of candidates for elective state
officers, 'coiigressmen and membefs of the state legislature, the bill
to go into force immediately so far as it related to elective city
and county officers. The call for the yeas and nays on this amend-
ment resulted in the first "lineup" vote on the primary question of
the two factions in the senate, as follows :

Yeas — Senator Beach, Eaton, Gaveney, Green, Hagemeister,

68 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

Johnson, Kreutzer, McDonough, Morse, Mosher, North, O'Neil,
Randolph, Riordan, Eoehr, Rogers, Whitehead, and Willy — 18.

NayS' — Senators Bird, Burns, Hatton, Hudnall, Martin, McGilli-
vray, Merton, Miller, Munson, Reukema, Sarau, Stout, Wipperman,
Wolff, and Wylie— 15.

Senator Whitehead then moved that "all rules interfering with
the concurrence of No. 97A at this time be suspended," which
motion was carried with but three senators voting in the negative.
They were Senators Hatton, McGillivray, and Munson. The bill
was then read a third time and concurred in as amended, the vote
being the same as the one by which Senator Gaveney's amendment
was adopted.

March 27 the bill was messaged to the assembly which, on
March 31, concurred in all the senate ainendments with the excep-
tion of the referendum section proposed by Senator Gaven^y. It
was returned to the senate on April 1 by message aiid that body
voted to adhere to the amendment by a vote of 19 to 14, Senator
Bird acting with the stalwarts when the question was put. The
bill was then messaged back to. the assembly and that body, on mo-
tion of Mr. Ray, refused to recede from its position and asked for
a conference. Senators Morse, Whitehead, and Beach were ap-
pointed to represent the senate and Messrs. Andrew, Frear, and Le
Roy were appointed as conferees for the lower house.

The Evolution a.nd Kevolution of the Peimaby. 69

CHAPTEE XV.

Why the Bill Was Passed.

The action of the state senate, while it received the support of
the entire stalwart membership of that body, was not in accord with
the judgment or wishes of the more conservative members. There
was a disposition on the part of several senators, of whom Senator
Whitehead was the most positive and uncompromising in his
opinion, to defeat the measure, and they had the votes to do it if that
plan had been decided upon. But other counsel prevailed.

It is a well known fact that the stalwart faction lacked leader-
ship during the years 1901, 1903, and 1903. There was no "boss."
The wing of the republican party represented as defending the
caucus and convention system in the interests of the "bosses" could
not produce one solitary boss in its hoiir of need to lead it in a
campaign. It was not because there were no men of ability in the
stalwart ranks. In point of fact it was charged at times that there
were no privates in the opposition army — they were all major
generals. There was an abundance of material for leadership, but
no leader.

At the time the primary bill was passed in 1903 the lines be-
tween the factions had been sharply drawn and the two United
States senators and certain members of congress had found them-
selves, without any overt acts of hostility on their part, forced
into the anti-administration camp. Among the latter was Eep-
resentative Babcock, probably one of the best equipped political
leaders in the nation and one of the men who had aided Gov.
La Follette in his campaign for the nomination in 1900. Mr.
Babcock had then served nearly ten years as chairman of the
republican congressional committee and he had won golden
opinions from the members of congress whose interests he had
protected in several campaigns. But h« made no attempt to organ-
ize the opposition to Gov. La Follette largely because of his respect
for the amenities which require that the senators be first consulted
when the interests of the party in the state become a subject of dis-
cussion and controversy.

Other republicans were restrained by the sarne considerations
from volunteering to take upon themselves the management of the
campaign, which explains why the stalwart forces were, in fact, an
army pf volunteers without officers or organization during those
eventful years. There was complaint from members of the legis-
lature of the failure of the national leaders to line up an effective
organization against the encroachments of the governor. When the
legislature met there were almost as many opinions as to the proper
course to pursue as there were stalwarts in the two houses and it
was discovered that it would be impossible to agree upon any line

70 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

of action unless the United States senators and members of con-
gress openly allied themselves with the members of the party at
home with whom they were known to be in sympathy.

In this emergency a messenger was sent to Washington for the
purpose of explaining the situation to the two senators and the
members of the lower house, particularly Congressman Babcock,
and get them to agree upon some line of action. Senator Quarles
out of deference to Senator Spooner's seniority, declined to move
without the express sanction of the latter, but he signified his will-
ingness to do his full duty in the work of redeeming the party in
the state from political disruption. Mr. Babcock took the same
position, arguing that it was the senior senator's place to either
lead the party himself or consent to the selection of some other
person to assume the responsibilities as well as the labors of lead-
ership. There was conference after conference. Senator Spooner's
well known distaste for practical politics, together with his dis-
inclination to authorize another, however able and willing to lead,
to speak and act for him, making it impossible for days to come
to an understanding.

The final outcome of the conference however, was that Mr.
Babcock was delegated to come to Wisconsin and assume the lead-
ership of the stalwart, or conservative republicans. One of the
conditions laid down by Senator Spooner before the arrangements
were completed was that the primary election bill with a referen-
dum clause was to be passed by the state senate. It was agreed
that the two United States senators and the members of congress
who were not in accord with Gov. La Pollette were to take an
active part in the next campaign for the purpose of defeating the
bill when it was presented to the people for their indorsement by
popular vote.

Having succeeded in the mission that took him to Washington,
the messenger returned to Wisconsin and reported. He was fol-
lowed in a few days by Mr. Babcock who established himself at
Madison and undertook to advise the stalwarts in the legislature as
to the course they should pursue. He assured the stalwart senators
that they could count on the co-operation of Senators Spooner and
Quarles, as well as certain congressmen of whom he was one, and
that an earnest effort would be made to perfect a real organization,
one that could go into a campaign with a prospect of winning.

With this understanding the stalwart members of the state sen-
ate agreed to carry out the plan proposed by Mr. Babcock, as
originally outlined by Senator Spooner, although Senator White-
head and others were not convinced of its wisdom. Mr. Babcock
assumed the responsibilities of the position assigned to him by
the other leaders and it was by his direction that the primary bill,
objectionable as it was to the stalwart state senators, was passed

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimaby. 71

practically in its original form with the referendum section at-
tached.

The conference of the two houses on the primary bill did not
accomplish anything. The members agreed to disagree as the final
outcome of several meetings, and the assembly solved the problem
by changing or amending the Gaveney referendum amendment in
a manner to meet the approval of the senate. The change made
was merely to submit the entire question to a vote of the people at
the general election in November, 1904, instead of submitting the
question of applying the law, to the nomination of state and legisla-
tive candidates only. This action was taken on May 19, and the
senate concurred in the amendment on May 20 by a vote of 26 to 3,
Senators Hatton and two democrats, Merton and North voting
against it. Senators Hagemeister, Kreutzer, Eandolph, and Wolff
were absent.

But, between the time the conference committees were ap-
pointed and the passage of tht5 bill by the two houses, a new record
was made up. It should be remembered that about every con-
ceivable amendment to the measure had been offered and rejected
by the assembly at the tirne the bill was considered under special
order. Also other bills, introduced by individual members who be-
lieved it had been given them to see the proper solution of the
primary election problem, had been killed from time to time by
both houses. In this way the entire ground had been covered, ap-
parently.

But the assembly conferees came to the meeting armed with six
distinct propositions, all embodying amendments that already had
been acted on by one or both houses of the legislature. They in-
sisted on having their propositions considered, but the senate con-
ferees replied that all of these propositions had been presented
to and voted down already, and Were not, therefore, proper sub-
jects of consideration by the conference committees. An adjourn-
ment was then taken and at a latter meeting a seventh proposition
was made- by the assembly conferees, which was rejected by the
senate conferees for the same reason that they refused to consider
the first six offers of amendment.

Meanwhile, the minutes of the meetings were carefully kept and
the investigator of the subject will find in the assembly journal
for that year, pages 902 to 911, the entire story as it was reported
by the committee of that house together with the seven proposi-
tions in detail. The record there made up is as complete as could
be desired by the most technical writer of campaign literature —
with one exception. The stalwarts had learned their lesson in
1901 and they were not caught without a record of their own.
They had made all the propositions now presented by the admin-
istration committeemen and had written them into the official
record. Their propositions had been rejected. They now replied

72 Political Refokm in Wisconsin.

that these amendments had been considered and rejected by the
legislature; they could not be presented again at the same session.
At least, the conference committee could not consider amendments
that have been disposed of finally.

Whatever the judgment of the student of events may be at this
time of the action of the two houses on the primary bill in 1903,
it can not be said that the stalwarts made any tactical blunders in
their management of the measure either in the two houses or in
conference. They did not aid in the manufacture of material to
be used against them in the campaign the following year. The
question in that campaign was put "up to the people" themselves
and the literature circulated during the campaign by the admin-
istration organization did not, because it could not, truthfully
charge the stalwarts with repudiating platform pledges in that
respect at least. They had given the voters an opportunity to speak
for themselves at the ballot box.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaby. 73

CHAPTEK XVI.
Akbiteaky Usurpation.

As has been explained, it was the intention of the stalwarts to
make the primary election measure the main issue in the campaign
of 1904. It was believed that, by coneentratiag on this issue, by con-
ducting a vigorous stumping campaign led by Senators Spooner
and Quarles, and by circulating literature explaining clearly the
character of the proposed law, many who had been indifferent to the
movement and others who had supported it could be convinced
of its unwisdom and induced to cast their votes against the ap-
proval of the bill.

But these well laid plans came to naught. The factional feel-
ing, the personal animosities — the poison in the political blood of
the state that had been growing more deadly in its malignity dur-
ing the four years of strife — reached a climax in the spring of that
year.

Wisconsin had been sowing the wind of malice; it now reaped
the whirlwind of hate. It had been planting suspicion and dis-
trust; it now came to the harvesting of corrupt practices such as
had never even been dreamed of. It had been scattering abroad
the seeds of revolution; it was only prevented from garnering a
crop of violence and bloodshed by the moderation of a large ele-
ment of its people who had not yet lost their ability to reason and
their respect for the law. '

The republican state convention met at Madison on May 18,
1904, on a call issued by a majority of the members of the state
central committee and against the protest of a minority of that
body. At this convention was made the crucial test of the ability
of citizens of Wisconsin with red blood in their veins to avoid the
natural consequences of acts calculated to provoke a breach of the
peace. -The history of that convention is written in hundreds of
pages of sworn testimony, official records, duly authenticated min-
utes of convention proceedings, and signed reports of committees.
It is unnecessary to go into detail here, but a brief narrative outline
of the events that brought about the subordination of the primary
election issue to more important interests is required to make the
history of that issue clear and definite in the minds of the reader.

It had been customary in years when presidential elections oc-
curred to hold two state conventions, one in the spring for the
election of delegates and alternates to the national convention and
the nomination of an electoral ticket ; the other in the summer to
noininate a state ticket and adopt a state platform. In this way
state issues were kept out of the convention that was called upon
to deal only with matters of national interest.

For the first time in the history of the state these two functions
were combined and one convention was called to perform both

74 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

offices. This was done in violation of party precedent and against
the protest of a minority of the state central committee and many
republican newspapers. There was no public demand for the
change ; there was no public sentiment in its favor ; no interests of
the people were to be served; no reform could be accomplished
by and no valid excuse offered for the action of the majority of the
committee in thus arbitrarily and without authority overriding
the customs and established practices of the party.

When the convention met it was found that out of 1,065 dele-
gates entitled to seats in the convention, 955 held credentials that
were on their face valid and sufficient to entitle them to seats in
that body and to participate in the work of organizing the conven-
tion. Of that number 496 1-6 were anti-La Follette and 458 5-6
were La Follette delegates.

These men were entitled to organize the convention and pass
finally upon the validity -of the claims of the delegates whose seats
had been jeopardized by the careless officers who had bungled the
work of making out credentials. There were thirty-nine La Fol-
lette delegates present with defective credentials and eleven anti-
La Follette delegates were in the same predicament. In each of these
cases the irregularity was not important or fatal and the admission
of all of these delegates would have raised the respective votes of
the two factions to 507 1-6 stalwart, 497 5-6 La Follette, with the
stalwarts still in the majority.

But the state central committee majority, made up of sixteen
rabid La Follette factionists, eight of whom were officeholders, de-
termined to organize the convention themselves. They threw out
the eleven stalwart votes on a trumped up contest and seated the
thirty-nine La Follette delegates. They then, on contests that were
clearly fradulent and unfair, unseated forty-four delegates that
held regular credentials, five of whom had been elected by direct
vote in the Second ward of Milwaukee, and seated in their places
delegates who held no credentials of any character. In only one
case was a pretense of fairness attempted. This was the case of
St. Croix county, where a contest — the only one — had been brought
by the stalwarts, and in which case the committee reported in favor
of dividing the vote equally between the legally elected stalwart
delegates and the illegal La Follette claimants. In this way the roll
of the convention was made up. ISTo opportunity was given the con-
vention to pass upon the qualifications of its own members, which
it had a right to do. The majority of the committee usurped
that right and exercised it arbitrarily.

But it was deemed necessary to adopt radical measures to carry
out this high handed proceeding — and it was done. A sergeant at
arms was appointed who would do as he was told. What his in-
structions were does not appear as a matter of record, but his acts
are eloquent on that point. He requested the chief of police of
Madison and the sheriff of Dane county to appoint a large number

The EvotuTioN and Revolution of the Primary. 75

of special officers to guard the convention and enforce order while
the outrage was being perpetrated. The police chief, H. C. Baker,
refused to comply with the request, but the sheriff was convinced
that a riot was imminent and he commissioned a large number of
deputy sheriffs to serve for this special occasion. These, together
with the assistants to the sergeant at arms, guarded the convention.
Among these deputies and assistants there were athletic partisans
of the governor, state game wardens, oil and factory inspectors,
football players from the university, at least one professional
athlete, and men with police records. There are affidavits on file
to substantiate these statements if any evidence is needed to con-
vince readers of their truth.

The gymnasium building on the university grounds was pre-
pared for the occasion with great care. All doors leading to that
part of the building to be occupied by delegates were closed, locked,
and braced in a substantial manner, with one single exception —
a small door at the side of the building. A wire partition was
erected between the delegates' portion of the hall and that occupied
by the public. A "runway" was constructed of lumber leading
from a point eighteen feet from the outside of the single narrow
entrance to a point eleven and, one-half feet inside the building.
Along this runway, or passage, was posted a double line of muscular
deputies and assistants numbering, according to one affidavit, at
least forty.

Through this double line of guards the delegates were required
to pass, and the passage was not a simple matter. Every person
entering the runway was forcibly seized and his badge examined.
He was roughly treated, manhandled by men appointed for that
purpose, and in some cases he was forced to submit to language
that was calculated to raise his temperature to fever heat. In this
way the administration supporters testified to their respect for the
representatives of republican voters who had been regularly elected
to attend and participate in a republican state convention.

It should be remembered that the badges worn by the delegates
and examined over and over again as the victims worked their way
laboriously through the double line of guards had been furnished
by the state central committee. The regularly accredited dele-
gates, sent there by republican voters to represent them, but whom
the majority of the committee had determined to unseat, were not
given badges and could not enter the building. They were not
even admitted to that part of the hall assigned to the public as the
tickets to that section also were carefully vised and passed out
only to favored citizens. It was to prevent the entrance of the un-
seated delegates that the 100 or more men were employed as a
force sufficient to enable the conspirators to successfully carry out
their plaas.

Subsequently a weak attempt was made to explain that an out

76 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

break on the part of the stalwarts was feared, but there was no
warrant for such a belief. It had been publicly, and freely talked
for days that, if the majority was refused its right to organize the
convention, there would be a "walk out" and a second convention.
Badges had been printed on which the word "Hiker" appeared in
prominent type. All the world' knows that the word "hike" means
to "walk." Furthermore, on the evening before the convention was
called to order at the gymnasium a meeting of the stalwart dele-
gates was held at the Fuller opera house. At that meeting M. G.
Jeffris of Janesville, one of the stalwart leaders, in an address out-
lining the program agreed upon, said :

"I know you feel intensely upon this subject, but remember that
when this body of delegates goes to the state convention we go as
gentlemen. Remember that the eyes of the people of the state are
upon you. Every man is called upon to suppress his feelings re-
gardless of the indignities that may be heaped upon him and con-
duct himself as a gentleman so that when this matter is over
everybody will be compelled to say that, while we insisted on our
rights and shall insist to the end, yet at no time did we do any
act that was not the act of a gentleman. We will go to that hall;
we will insist that the delegates who have been duly elected and
accredited to that convention be admitted to the floor of the hall.
We will insist upon our rights, but we will have them in such a
manner that the people at large will say that we acted as gentle-
men."

They went as gentlemen and they were gentlemen to the end.
Not one act of a stalwart ; not one word even under the most humil-
iating personal insults while being pawed over at the door by ad-
ministration bullies or, after entering the hall, where they were
browbeaten and insulted by administration factionists, could be ob-
jected to as undignified or ungentlemanly. They presented their
demands for a hearing in the strongest possible manner, appeal-
ing without hope for justice and fair play, and when they were
voted down, or declared out of order — as was usually the case —
they withdrew and organized a legal convention with a majority of
the legally elected delegates in attendance. Whenever a vote was
taken on a point raised, or a motion made by a stalwart delegate,
the delegates illegally seated by the state central committee voted,
as well a^ the assistants to the sergeant at arms and the deputy
sheriffs when the roll was not called.

As an illustration of incidents occuring prior to the withdrawal
of the anti-La Follette delegates, two brief excerpts from affidavits
subsequently filed will suflfioe. One is from a sworn statement by
W. F. Loomis, a La Follette delegate who did not withdraw but rcr-
mained in the gymnasium convention until the end because he had
been instructed by his constituents to vote for La Follette. Mr.
Loomis later made a voluntary sworn statement in which he said,
among other things :

The EvoLUTioiif and Revolution of the Pbimaby. t7

"That on getting there (to the delegate entrance of the gym-
nasium building) he found that all doors of admission to that part
of said hall, alloted to delegates were barred except a side door,
which was guarded by at least forty persons, some of whom wore
badges upon which were printed 'Deputy Sheriff'; others wore
badges reading 'Assistant Sergeant at Arms,' and the remainder
were dressed in policemen's uniforms. A double file of such guards
was arranged extending some distance outside and inside of said
doorway, so that in order to enter said convention hall it was neces-
sary for the delegates to pass single file between said two lines
of guards. Each member of said guard, in turn, grasped and took
by the arm or clothing in a rude and insulting manner, ostensibly
for the purpose of examining said badge to see that it entitled the
person wearing it to admission to said convention hall. That this
deponent saw one man who wore his badge on his vest instead of on
his coat and he was refused admission until he put said badge on
his coat.

"Deponent further says that all of said guards were strangers
to him, that they were all large muscular men, of heavy build, and
evidently selected because of their physical strength. That on the
inside of said convention hall, scattered around the sides of the
building and in the aisles, were a great many persons of a similar
description, wearing badges upon which was printed 'Assistant Ser-
geant at Arms.' Not less than sixty of said guards and assistant
sergeant at arms were in that part of said hall allotted to delegates.
That the deponent noticed said guards applauded La FoUette's
speakers and delegates and saw them repeatedly hiss, hoot and
groan at anti-La Follette delegates speaking in said convention."

Spencer Haven, an anti-La Follette delegate from St. Croix
county who was admitted to the convention- with one-half vote,
swore to the following facts :

"That on the inside of the convention hall, and scattered along
the aisles and around the sides of the building allotted to delegates,
were a great many persons of a similar description, wearing badges
on which was .printed 'Assistant Sergeant at Arms.' That during
the proceedings of the convention upon votes taken viva voce they
voted invariably with the La Follette faction, and in so voting,
added their vociferous voices to the vote of said faction. That there
was as many as a dozen of such persons so labeled 'Assistant Ser-
geant at Arms' in the immediate vicinity of that part of the con-
vention where this deponent was sitting, and their conduct was
such in voting upon questions that came before the convention as to
attract the attention of deponent and other delegates sitting near
him, and finally some one of said delegates, in the presence and
hearing of deponent, asked these persons, so labeled 'Assistant Ser-
geant at Arms,' whether they were delegates of the convention,,
and they replied 'Yes,' and that they were voting, and also re-
marked that they could vote louder than deponent and the other
delegates sitting near him could."

Before the convention was organized M. B. Eosenberry, a mem-
ber of the minority of the state central committee, made a request
of the chairman, Gen. Bryant, that he, Eosenberry, be recognized
by. the temporary chairman of the convention for the purpose of
presenting a minority report of the state central committee, signed
by six members. He was told to make arrangements with I. L.
Lenroot who was to be temporary chairman, which he did, and was

78 Political Reform in Wiscoi^sin.

given a promise that he would be recognized immediately after
the close of the temporary chairman's address. Mr. Eosenberry
took a seat on the platform eight or ten feet to the left of, and be-
hind the stand at which Mr. Lenroot stood when he addressed the
convention. As he sat down he was surrounded by three persons,
strangers to him, each a noteworthy example of physical prowess
and each wearing a badge that indicated that he was an assistant to
the sergeant at arms. These three men refused to allow Mr. Eosen-
berry to move or Change his position at any time, but forcibly held
him in his seat until Mr. Lenroot had finished his address. At the
appointed time Mr. Eosenberry arose to hi-s feet, with his guards
still clustered about him, although he had explained to them who
he was and that he had the consent of Gen. Bryant and Mr. Len-
root to his presence. In spite of this explanation, and although
Mr. Eosenberry had several times requested his guards to cease in-
terfering with his freedom, they persisted in their surveillance over
his acts. On this point Mr. Eosenberry said in his affidavit :

"It was impossible for him to move without personal encounter;
that by reason of the fact that it was a time of great excitement and
high tension, this affiant preferred to bear the personal humiliation
incident to such insulting, conduct on the part of said persons rather
than precipitate a personal struggle * * * and this affiant is
informed and verily believes that said persons were engaged in such
insultifig conduct by the direction of their superiors, and that their
action was part of a preconcerted plan to deny affiant, along with
other anti-La Pollette delegates, the common courtesies and rights
of delegates in a republican convention."

It may be added that, when Mr. Eosenberry had completed the
reading of his report and attempted to move that it be substituted
for the majority report, he was seized by his guards and forced into
his chair.

' The affidavits which establish beyond controversy the details of
this most high handed proceeding fill a large volume and they are all
of the same tenor. They tell of personal insults, exasperating
taunts, and actual physical violence, all calculated, if not deliber-
ately designed, to lead to physical resistance and bloodshed. In
point of fact, there are few states where such proceedings would
not have brought about an outbreak of hostilities and a resort to
uiob law.

But the stalwart majority restrained themselves — to their ever-
lasting credit be it said — and submitted with dignified composure
to the repeated acts of injustice, and worse, that werfe inflicted upon
them by the minority supported by physical force, ostentatiously
displayed. The addresses made to the convention by M. B. Eosen-
berry, M. 6. JefEris, and B. E. Hicks were models of convention
oratory, appealing as they did to the sense of justice that ought to
have actuated the administration faction. Their appeals were met
with taunts by the minority speakers, and they withdrew from the
convention.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pkimaby. 7S

CHAPTER XVII.
The Conflicting Decisions.

At the convention held in the Fuller Opera house the same
evening a committee on credentials was appointed to which was de-
livered the record of the credentials secured by the minorit)' of the
state central committee. The copies of the credentials were ' ex-
amined by the committee and all cases where contests had been
filed were presented to and acted upon by the convention itself.
When this work was completed and a vote was taken it was found
there was present in the stalwart convention, and voting, 567 duly
elected republican delegates, or a majority of sixty-nine votes of
the entire number legally qualified to sit in a republican convention.

This majority then proceeded to nominate a state ticket at the
head of which they placed the Hon. S. A. Cook as the republican
eandidatefor governor. Senators J. C. Spooner and J. V. Quarles,
Representative J. W. Babcock, and the Hon. Emil Baensch were
elected delegates to the republican national convention. A plat-
form was adopted and a state central committee chosen. In order
that, so far as was practicable, the split in the party might be con-
fined to the state ticket and prevented from affecting the candidates
on the national ticket, arrangements were made to name as presi-
dential electors the men chosen at the gymnasium convention.

As a part of the platform adopted by the convention held , at
the Puller opera house — which platform was not printed in the
blue book the following year among other platforms of all parties —
the following plank is found :

"Seventh — The last legislature enacted and has submitted to the
people to he voted upon at the general election a proposed primary
election law. This law proposes a radical change in the nominat-
ing procedure of all parties, and afEects every elector in the exercise
of one of his functions, and we approve of the action of the republi-
can senate in declining to put into immediate operation by a ma-
jority vote of one party such a law, without first giving an oppor-
tunity to all the voters of the state, each voter upon his own re-
sponsibility and conscience to pass upon it at the polls. It has
passed the platform stage. If it shall not be the will of the people
to do away with all conventions in the future, we favor the enact-
ment of such legislation as shall provide specifically for the elec-
tion and accrediting of delegates, and the legal effect which shall be
given to credentials duly executed, to the end that it shall be im-
possible for any power but the convention itself to overrule the
prima facie title of delegates and turn preliminarily a majority into
a minority."

The convention that continued in session at the gymnasium
building also adopted a platform in which was placed a primary
election plank which reads as follows :

"We indorse and approve the administration of Gov. Robert M.
La Follette as conspicuously able, honest and economical. Through

80 Political Refoem in Wisconsin.

his fearless, conscientious and statesmanlike advocacy of a faithful
compliance with party promises and against the most malicious and
corrupt opposition, a primary elector, employer, employe, will. In
accordance with just principles of government, without coercion or
intimidation, be able to express his true conviction at the polls.
We regret that the opponents of this measure, in violation of the
party's most sacred promises and three times repeated in its plat-
form, have thus far been able to postpone the operation of the law,
and we denounce such action on their, part as a breach of good faith
to their "constituents and as treason to the republican party. We
heartily commend the primary election law proposed by the last
legislature to all fair minded citizens, regardless of party affiliation,
for their approval at the polls. This measure should stand above
partisan consideration as going to the ground work of popular gov-
ernment. The campaign leading up to this convention must illus-
trate to all citizens of Wisconsin the difficulty of securing a true expres-
sion of the popular will under Hie present caucus and convention system,
when private interests conflict with puMic welfare."

When the contesting delegation elected by the gymnasium con-
vention, E. M. La Pollette, Isaac Stephenson, J. H. Stout, and "VV.
D. Connor, appeared before the national committee in Chicago, a
full and fair hearing was given them. Six hours were consumed
in listening to the arguments of the attorneys for the two sets
of delegates; certified copies of all the credentials were at hand;
the minutes of the two conventions and affidavits of all parties who
had anything of importance to say bearing on the case were exam-
ined, questions were asked and answered, and the committee decided
unanimously in favor of the legality of the anti-La Follette con-
vention and recommended that the delegates elected at that con-
vention be seated.

The matter was then referred to the committee on credentials
appointed by the national committee and the evidence was all laid
before that body. The attorney for the La Follette delegates, how-
ever, did not make an argument, contenting himself with filing a
statement to the effect that he believed the committee was preju-
diced and that his clients would not receive a fair hearing. The
committee spent a part of one afternoon, the evening, the night,
and a part of the next forenoon in examining the evidence in the
case. The matter was thoroughly and impartially examined into
and the decision of this committee was the same as that of the na-
tional committee. The vote to recommend that the stalwart dele-
gates be seated was unanimous.

The republican national convention finally passed upon the
merits of the contest and, by a practically unanimous vote, seated
John C. Spooner, Joseph V. Quarles, Joseph W. Babcock, and
Emil Baensch as the regularly elected and duly qualified delegates
from "Wisconsin.

Having secured a decision from the national committee, the
committee on credentials of the national convention, and the re-
publican national convention itself, there still remained the neces-

The EvoLUTioiiT and Kevolxjtiok op the Primary. 81

sity of appealing to the Supreme court. Walter L. Houser, an un-
compromising partisan of the governor, was secretary of state and
it was his duty to make up the ballots to be used at the election
in November. All who were acquainted with the secretary did not
stop to question what his course would be. They knew he would
ignore the decision of the national convention and place the names
of the candidates nominated at the gynmasium convention on the
ticket as the regular republican nominees. Certain formal steps
were taken to induce him to accept the republican national conven-
tion as the highest authority in the republican party and the Su-
preme court was asked to order him to comply with the request.

The decision of the court, handed down on Oct. 5, one month
before the election was a peculiar one. This decision was written
by Justice Marshall, a dissenting opinion being filed by Chief Jus-
tice Cassoday, who held that the court had jurisdictioii and that
the nominees of the Fuller opera house convention were the regular
nominees of the republican party. A majority of the court, how-
ever, held that, under the statutes, the republican state central
committee was the only bo'dy that had jurisdiction to determine
-the regularity of its own proceedings or the proceedings of, a re-
publican convention. In other words, it was the supreme author-
ity in the state; it could, if it decided to do so, ignore the decision
of the national convention. It had a right to usurp authority that
belonged to the convention itself, and, should its action be im-
peached, it could hear, try, and determine its own case.

This is not to be taken as a criticism of the Supreme court's
decision. It is merely intended as a comment on the remarl^able
statute construed by the court when it rendered its decision. The
court is entitled to and must always be accorded the most pro-
found respect. It is permitted, however, to condemn a law that
furnishes a statutory warrant for an outrage on justice and po-
litical morals. A law that will rob the majority of any party of
the fruits of victory by permitting a minority to govern, is not a
good law. The result of the election disposed of that law, as no
delegates are elected now, and the offending statute may be per-
mitted to rest in peace.

It is not surprising that, in the midst of a controversy like
the one described the primary election law was, in a measure, lost
sight of. Senators Spooner and Quarles, M. G. Jeffris, J. 6.
Monahan, and other speakers referred to it in their addresses
while stumping the, state, but there were other matters of more re-
cent birth that called for explanation at length. Only brief and
occasional mention was made of the proposed law in the literature
circulated by the stalwart central committee. The campaign^ was
in fact, one of personalities, as is always the case in factional
party, as well as in family quarrels. It thus came about that an
issue which had been fought over and discussed at length for three

82 PowTicAi, Refoem in Wisconsin.

years was practically smothered at the time it came up for final
approval or defeat at the polls.

The result was that thp primary election measure was indorsed
by the voters at the polls by a majority of 50,507. The total vote
east on this question was 310,891, while the total vote cast for all
candidates for governor that year was 449,570, of which Gov. La
Pollette received 327,253, and George W. Peek, the democratic can-
didate, 176,301. The total vote on the primary election question
was less than one-half the vote for governor; it was less by 16,363
than the vote for La Follette; it fell 11,416 short of the combined
vote against La Follette. The vote in favor of the measure was
96,554 less than the La Follette vote, and the vote against it fell
short 143,125 of the combined vote against La Follette.

Following the decision of the Supreme court, the stalwarts lost
all semblance of an organization and their forces were divided as a
natural consequence. Large numbers vote'd the democratic ticket.
Others, who could not overcome their republican training, voted for
the La Follette ticket on the score of regularity as laid down by
the court. The original stalwart candidate, S. A. Cook, had with-
drawn from the race and MaJ. Edward Scofield, former governor,
had been placed on the ticket, but no pretense was made of sup-
portmg that ticket. Maj. Scofield himself asked republicans to vote
for Peek. A bare 12,136 old line republicans could not bring them-
selves to the point of voting for a democrat or for La Follette and
they voted for Scofield against his protest. Thus the governor was
re-elected for a second time and the primary election law was in-
dorsed by the people.

The BvoLtTTioN and Revolution of the Primary. 8S^

CHAPTER XVIII.

Questions That Must be Answered.

The questions to be answered by the people of Wisconsin at this
time are: Is the primary election law worth what it has cost the
state in money and bad blood ? Has it fulfilled any of the promises
of its advocates ? Has it dethroned the political boss and destroyed
the political machine? Have the political morals of the state
been elevated by it? Has it improved the personnel of the office
holding class? Has the public service been benefited by its opera-
tions? Has it made corrupt practices in the nomination of candi-
dates more difficult? Has this law, which was recommended as
"going to the very groundwork of popular government" by giving
the voter a direct voice in the nomination of candidates, resulted
in any benefit, direct or indirect, to the voter himself? Has it
brought the government "closer to the people?" Are the people's
liberties more securely guarded? Are the people better governed
since that law went into operation ?

If these questions, or any of them, can truthfully be answered
in the affirmative, let no man lay impious hands upon that law.
If a negative answer must be given, the statute should be changed
to correct the mistakes of its authors. This is all there is to the
matter. No partisan or personal interests, no factional considera-
'tions, must be permitted to postpone the work of framing the
needed amendments, nor should the remodeling of the law be taken
up in a spirit of controversy. There has been enough of con-
troversy; enough of crimination and recrimination; enough of fac-
tional strife. The time is come when cool, calm reason should hold
sway, and the work of real reform must be undertaken with the sole
aim of adjusting the law regulating the nomination- of candidates
to the needs of the state as indicated by the experiences of the last
twenty years.

The primary election law was not the cause of the factional
war that has made the last decade a memorable one in the state.
It was merely an incident, one of several, that made the controversy
peculiarly exasperating by reason of th£ bitterness with which the
issues were supported and opposed. But, under its influence and
by reason of the opportunities it offers for personal politics, the
work of party disintegration is going forward at an alarming pace
and there is urgent need of some means by which order may be
brought out of the prevailing political chaos and government by
parties — real representative government — restored to the people of
the state.

Government by parties and government of parties by the mem-
bers of the parties themselves are essential to the perpetuity of
our institutions. Government by individuals, however able, in-

84 Political Reform, in WiscoNsii*.

evitably spells despotism. Party responsibility on the one hand
and a wise distribution of powers between the co-ordinate branches
of the government on the other are the means by which the neces-
sary checks and balances are provided for the protection of our
rights and as a guaranty of our liberties.

The overthrow of parties through the ascendency of the indi-
vidual destroys party responsibility. Party organization and party
leaders disappear with party principles, and individuals take their
places with organized personal followings bearing the motto, "Any-
thing to win," as their most sacred principle. The discussion of
real, principles is lost in the public exchange of bitter personalities.
Even factional strife, deplorable as such a condition must be, is
soon displaced by something worse — personal contests for power.
This is not a theory; it is a plain statement of fact based upon
recent experiences in this state.

Wisconsin has reached a stage -in ihe development of personal
politics where parties are a negligible quantity, and the primary
election law has contributed to this result by putting a premium on
office seeking through direct personal effort, unflagging energy, self
advertising and a liberal expenditure of money. This condition is
illi;istrated by the city of Milwaukee. In 1898, after the municipal
election, there were filed under the corrupt practices act 17-5 ex-
pense statements by candidates, amounting in the aggregate to
$8,280.93. Of this amount $3,669.49 was contributed to ward clubs
and committees by the candidates. Following the municipal elec-
tion in 1908, ten years later, the expense statements filed, 274 in
number, amounted to $50,479.49, but there were no contributions
to ward clubs because there were no ward clubs.

Where are the Wisconsin political clubs of former years?
They have disappeared with the political parties they were or-
ganized to support and assist. There is not at present writing in
the city of Milwaukee one effective club organized to work for the
success of a political party. There are personal organizations, or
clubs, designed to advance the political fortunes of some favorite
leaders and made up for the most part of followers who hope to
profit by the success of those leaders, but there are no party ward
clubs composed of .business and professional men whose sole aim is
to work for the triumph of party principles in which they believe.

Under the old system of making party nominations in conven-
tions composed of representatives of the voters of the party, the
party could and was held to a strict accountability for the acts of its
office;rs:,, It therefore selected its candidates with some degree of
caution. . It is true that large sums of money were expended in
some of the campaigns in electing, or trying to elect, party tickets.
This^, money was expended by party committees and the fun^ was
derived from contributions by members of the party. The nomii.
nees of the party usually contributed to this fund according to .

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaby. 86

their ability, but the largest part of the fund came from members
of the party who were not candidates for office.

When an officer was elected in this way, the party paying the
expense, he was accountable to his party for his official acts and his
party was responsible to the people. The contributions to the
campaign funds were not as a rule made with a great amount of
publicity. In point of fact, it was seldom that the' candidates knew
to whom the party was indebted for contributions to its campaign
fund. The hands of state, county, or legislative officers were not
tied by financial obligations of any kind. No demands were ever
made upon officers in this state for favors based upon campaign con-
tributions to parties.

Under the primary system all the money contributed to a pri-
mary campaign, must go directly to the individual seeking the of-
fice or his agent, and, while there may be no contract in definite
terms between candidate and contributor with respect to a quid
pro quo, should that contributor's interests become involved at any
time in such a manner as to require official action on the part of
the candidate who has been favored, it is not difficult to guess what
would be the result. However honest .he may be, the official is
likely to stretch a point in order to favor a friend who has placed
him under obligations. He will not care to be classed as an ingrate.

Much has been said in the past about the influence of large
corporations in politics. The most effective way in which those
great industrial and commercial bodies can wield an influence in
political circles is by the use of money. The easiest way to use
money in politics is to place the individual officeholder under direct
obligation to the contributor. The primary election law offers an
ideal opportunity for the use of money in this way. Should the
big corporations feel so disposed they have an opening now by
which they can enter the political field in Wisconsin and rope,
throw," hog tie, and brand a large number of public officers by a
judicious use of corporate funds. As it stands, the law not only
permits, but forces candidates to spend large sums of money in
primary campaigns. As the emoluments of public office are not as
a rule so liberal as to warrant the expenditure by a candidate of
a king's ransom in the effort to secure an office, there is an opening
for the generous contributor, be^he personally interested or merely
a representative of a corporation, to step in and offer to carry a
part of the burden.

86 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEB XIX.
The Cost op a Campaign.

It cost candidates in the city of Milwaukee $50,479.49 to run
for office in 1908 with the primary election law in operation. It
cost but $8,280.93 in 1898 when the primary law~was not in opera-
tion. The difference, $43,198.56, it will be conceded, is a heavy
tax to place upon candidates for office. It is true there were more
candidates running for office in 1908 than in 1898, but that is
merely another illustration of the operations of the new statute.
So far as the operations of the corrupt practices act are concerned
it may be said that when that law was new it was respected and
obeyed by a large percentage of the candidates for office. The only
material change made in the law since 1897 has been to require the
district attorney to demand statements frpm candidates who have
failed to comply with its provisions after a certain period.

As an indication of the effect of the primary election law on
the expenses of candidates for office the following tables compiled
from the records in the offices of the city clerk of Milwaukee, the
county clerk of Milwaukee county, and the secretary of state, will
serve. The year 1904 was the last convention year in which can-
didates were nominated under the old Milwaukee primary law in
'both city and county, and 1906 was the first primary election year.
It should be explained that one important statement, that of Mayor
Eose, has been lost from the files for the year 1904, although there
is little doubt that such a statement was rendered at the time.
CITY OF MILWAUKEE.

Administrative

All Candidates and Executive All City

for Mayor. Officers. ' Officers.

1898 $ 1,574.60 ? 4,180.35 $ 8,280.93

1900 3,081.50 5,754.90 13,547.95

1902 1,966.64 7,463.91 17,820.61

1904 627.25 3,203.00 9,628.80

1906 14,735.21 20,628.89 27,915 49

1908 25,500.13 30,090.38 50,479.49

The same abnormal increase in the expenses of candidates is
shown in the statements filed with the county clerk, from which
the following table is made up :

ALL COUNTY OFFICERS.

1898 — 103 statements .$14,887.91

1900 — 67 statements 24',052!58

1902 — 53 statements 27J92!l4

1904 — ■ 57 statements ^ 13456.35

1906 — 95 statements 69]873!o3

1908 — 87 statements 46i308!87

The excess of the amount expended in 1906 over that of 1908
is explained by two statements, those of Francis McGovern and F.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaey. 87

X. Boden, candidates for district attorney. Mr. McGovern ren-
dered an account amounting to $16,699,85, and Mr. Boden's state-
ment placed his expenses at $15,252.58. In 1904, Mr. McGovern,
running for the same office, spent $1,086.90. Deducting these two
statements from the total, there still remains $37,920.45, as the ex-
penses of the other candidates in the first primary year.

One of the most important offices of the county is that of sheriff,
and it is one that is much sought after. In the last 'three cam-
paigns the candidates for that office expended the following
amounts in their attempts to secure the nomination and election:
1904, the last convention year, $3,075.00; 1906, the first primary
year, $6,715.58 ; 1908, $9,011,86.

That the increase in the amount expended is not always due
to a multiplication of candidates is shown by the abstract of
statements of candidates for mayor filed with the city clerk which
follows. David S. Eose, for instance, has been a candidate for that
office at each election during the entire ten year period, and he has
been the successful candidate each time except in 1906, when he
was defeated by Sherman M. Becker. Mayor Rose's statement for
1904, the last convention year, can not be found, although he says
he filed it according to law, but the fact that this veteran candidate,
one who is acknowledged to have a large personal following in the
city, found it necessary to increase his expenses under the primary
law is clearly shown and it is significant. Another significant fact
is that so many candidates have entered the race in 1906 and 1908
with ample funds and a willingness to spend liberally. Here is a
list of the mayoralty candidates for ten years' with the amounts
expended by each :

FOR MAYOR.

1898— David S. Rose (D) $ 933.25

William Geuder (R) 578.25

H. J. Baumgaertner (R) 63.10

H. H. Steinman (D) , nothing

$ 1,574.60

1900— David S. Rose (D) : $ 1,877.55

H. J. Baumgaertner (R) 1,197.35

Frederic Heath (S. D.) 6.50

$ 3,081.40

1902— David S. Rose (D) $ 1,291.65

Charles Anson (R) : 675.00

? 1,966.65

1904 — David S. Rose (D) — no statement

Guy D. Goff (R) -. $ 600.00

A. A. Clas, by petition 27.25

Victor L. Berger (S. D.), nothing

, $ 627.25

Political Reform in Wisconsin.

1906— David S. Rose (D) $ 2,027.10

W. G. Bruce (D) 1,662.03

S. M. Becker (R) 9,207.91

W. J. Piebrantz (R) 1,784.62

J. Vierthaler (S. L.) ; 53.55

W. A. Arnold ( S. D. )— nothing

$14,735.21

1908— David S. Rose (D) $ 5,223.89

W. H. Graebner (D) 2,488.23

Louis A. Dahlman (R) 7,900.69

T. J. Pringle (R) 6,141.02

John T. Kelly (R) 3,205.80

G. A. Zilgitt (D) 535.00

Emil Seidel (S. D.) 5.50

Thomas Gardner (Pro.) — nothing

$25i500.13
Turning now to the expense statements filed with the secretary
of state since the corrupt practices act went into effect in 1898, the
same climb of expenses upward is noticed. No account is taken of
the few candidates for the legislature who are required by law to file
their statements at Madison, the examination being confined to
state officers, members of congress, and United States senators.

For
Governor.

1898 $ 5,821.04

1900 6,780.93

1902 7,184.61

1904 8,061.74

1906 17,407.25

1908 10,854.70

Lieut.
Governor.
$ 1,216.75
795.00
1,073.53
1,258.60
15,031.46
4,006.42
Attorney
General.

1898 .$ 815.50

1900 648.26

1902 1,181.15

1904 1,015.85

1906 4,801.58

1908 1,023.92

CONGKESSIONAL TICKET.

1898 $ 19,437.75

1900 19,834.88

1902 24,276.20

1904 23,538.46

1906 45,327.78

Sec. State

of State. Treas.

I 2,327.72 $ 1,472.80

1,166.04 704.49

3,788.28 2,402.75

4,106.20 3,575.50

3,317.07 8,792.35

907.35 1,659.70

Insurance State

Com. Ticket.

$ 169.87 $11,823.71

1,176.53 11,271.07

2,026.74 17,607.06

4,583.78 22,601.67

1,838.33 51,188.04

4,561.09 23,013.19

UNITED STATES SENATE.

1899 $ 6,760.60

1903— nothing

1905 262.87

1907 6,187.89

1909 192,977.59

1908 50,417.79

The decrease in the cost to candidates for state offices in the
campaign of 1908 when compared with 1906 is explained by the
fact that the state officers were all in the field for renomination
and re-election, and, as it has been customary in this state to recog-
nize the right to a second term, there was little opposition to the
old officers with the single exception of the candidate for insurance
commissioner. Still, the expenses that year were more than double
the amount reported in 190^,

The Evolution and Revoltttion of the Primary. 89

CHAPTER XX.
Ebpudiated by its Friends.

Three times since it was enacted into law. and put in force in
1904 by approval of the voters at the polls, has the primary stat-
ute been repudiated by the men who were responsible for its adop-
tion as the law of Wisconsin. In 1906 Francis McGovern was a
candidate for renomination for the office of -district attorney of
Milwaukee county, and he was defeated by Frank X. Boden by a
vote of 13,605 to 12,906. This was the result of a direct primary
where the voters used the ordinary ballot, the nearest approach to
an Australian ballot Iniown in this state, and signified their choice
of candidates under a system designed to give "the people the abso-
lute power to say who their candidates for office should be — of in-
suring to each man an equal voice in the selection of candidates."

The day following the primary Mr. McGovem, who was one of
the original primary law advocates and a leader in the fight for
its enactment, was quoted by a newspaper as saying that he was
defeated fairly, or words to that effect. Later, he changed his mind
and filed a newspaper indictment against the citizens who voted
for Mr. Boden, charging that they were all grafters or friends of
grafter" He was subsequently elected by a vote of 15,510, an in-
crease over his primary vote of 3,604, while Mr. Boden polled but
13,783, an increase of but 178 above his primary vote. It is a
significant fact that Mr. Thiel, the social democratic candidate for
district attorney, ran 2,213 votes behind .the highest vote polled for
a candidate on his ticket. But that was an election matter and
ought not to appear in the account against the primary law ex-
periment.

Again, in 1908; H. L. Ekern, former speaker of the asseinbly,
another leader in the campaign for the enactment of the primary
law, was a candidate for renomination in Trempealeau county, and
he was opposed and defeated by H. L. Twesme by a vote of 2,157
to 2,013. Nothing occurred at this election that might not be ex-
pected at any Wisconsia primary. The total vote of the two re-
publican candidates was 4,170. In 1902 the total vote for assembly-
man in that county, democratic and republican, was 2,623 ; in 1904
it was 4,510 of which 1,201 were cast for the democratic candidate,
leaving 3,309 as the largest republican vote ever cast for assembly
in that county previous to 1908 ; in 1906 the total vote of both
parties was 2,345. These figures indicate the extent to which
democrats participated in republican primaries in 1908.

As in the case of Mr. McGovern two years before, Mr. Ekern
refused to abide by the decision of the primary and came out as an
independent candidate by petition. He was defeated at the elec-

so POLTTICAL ReFOEM IN WISCONSIN.

tion in November^ being less fortunate than the first primary
election bolter.

Mr. Ekern's cause was supported in the campaign for the elec-
tion by a majority of the persistent La Follette men. The word
"persistent" is used in this connection to distinguish the men who
have continued to be loyal to the senator since the nunierous cracks
and splits in the so-called "halfbreed" faction appeared, breaking
it up into warring tribes that have nothing in common but their
dislike of the stalwarts. Senator La Follette went into Trempeal-
eau county and delivered public addresses in support of Mr. Ekern,
thereby giving his personal approval to the bolters and their leader.
On the other hand. Gov. James 0. Davidson took the stump for
Mr. Twesme, arguing that consistency demanded of .all men who
had supported the primary election movement a loyal support of
the candidates nominated by the party at the primaries now held
under the provisions of the law they had caused to be enacted.

The third instance of repudiation of the primary election law by
the men who were instrumental in forcing the law upon the peo-
ple of the state was one that attracted some attention even beyond
the borders of the state. Senator Isaac Stephenson, nominated at
the primary held in September, 1908, over S. A. Cook, Francis
McGovern, and W. H. Hatton, appeared before the legislature for
election as the regularly nominated republican candidate. But the
cordial sentiments of mutual esteem that formerly had bound
Senators La Follette and Stephenson together in the closest bonds
of interest and purpose had changed. The followers of the senior
senator refused to abide by the decision of the primary and de-
manded an investigation into the amount of money expended by the
Junior senator in securing the nomination. They also wanted to
know who got the money. Mr. Stephenson was re-elected after a
time. It has been said that the investigators are still dissatisfied
with results and are determined to pile up still more testimony
indicative of the blessings that are inseparable from the operations
of this most perfect law — this law that puts up the party nomina-
tion at auction to be knocked down to the highest bidder.

Fair minded, clean handed citizens will not file objections to an
investigation designed to expose corruption and punish offenders
against the corrupt practices act, but they might have expected —
and many of them did — just such a campaign as the one waged in
1908 for the seat in the United States senate. The expense state-
ments on file in the office of the secretary of state show that the
contest for that nomination cost the candidates $193,977.59. It.
is not reasonable to suppose these statements are accurate to a
cent. In point of fact, supplemental statements were subse-
quently filed that do not appear in this total. By adding to the
sworn statements of the candidates for the United States senate
the $96,788.36 expended in Milwaukee city and county the same

The Evolution ajnu Ukvolution of the Peimaby. 91

year, the $23,013.19 spent by candidates for state offices, and the
$50,417.79 spent by candidates for congress the tidy sum of $363,-
196.93 is obtained. It would be interesting to know what the
candidates in the seventy counties not mentioned expended and
what the total for the entire state amounted to.

The story of the contest for the election in the legislature last
winter that resulted in the return of Mr. Stephenson to the United
States senate is written in the volumes of testimony taken before
the investigation committees. It is a story of lavish expenditure
of money by all four candidates in perfecting state, organiza-
tions and making a state canvass for votes. But this result was
anticipated and pointed out in advance by the opponents of the pri-
mary election law. "The certain effect of the law in operation,"
about which Gov. La Follette was so eloquent ia his message to' the
legislature in 1901, embraced, among other things, the expenditure
of large sums of money -by candidates seeking nominations.

The real significance of that investigation is found in the fact
that the La Follette contingent, or branch, of the halfbreed faction
repudiated their own law when they refused to support Senator
Stephenson. Senator Stephenson spent money liberally in securing
the nomination, and in doing this he merely followed his uniform
practice. He spent money liberally in the interests of Senator La
Follette when that gentleman was building up his faction in this
state and it was to be expected that he would be no less liberal when
he was himself a candidate for office. The other candidates were
as free in the use of money as Mr. Stephenson when "their ability
to pay" is considered. Mr. McGovern, who says he is a poor man
comparatively, having spent more than $16,000 two years before
in running for the office of district attorney of Milwaukee county,
found it necessary to dispose of more than $11,000 in the sen-
atorial campaign. When men of Mr. McGovern's moderate means
can find approximately $28,000 in two years to invest in office-
seeking, it is not surprising that Mr. Stephenson should take from
his many millions a paltry $107,000 to be used in the same man-
ner.

Without any disposition to defend Mr. Stephenson's large ex-
penditures of money, it may be well to consider some of the neces-
sities in the case of a man, who seeks a United States senatorship
under the conditions under which Mr. Stephenson was a candidate.
He announced his candidacy less than seven weeks before the pri-
mary. There was no party organization that he could avail him-
self of. The fact is the contest was within the so-called republican
party of Wisconsin. There are seventy-one counties in this state
and in order to feel reasonably certain of success, it must have
been necessary to build an organization in each county. Every man
who has had anything tp do with' political work knows that organ-
izations of that character can not be created without money. The

92 Political Reform iiir Wisconsin.

necessary advertising for meetings, hall rent, messenger service, and
many other expenditures, all perfectly proper, amount to large
sums. It may be argued that such an organization is unnecessary
or objectionable, and that people know whom to vote for without
being dragged into political massmeetings. It must, however, be
clear to every one that some effort is required. The voter must
at least know who the candidate is. There are in round numbers
700,000 voters in the state of Wisconsin. The least and most iu-
ofEensive thing that a candidate for United States senator or state .
of&ce can do is to write each voter a letter. That alone will cost
$35,000. If Mr. Stephenson had addressed five letters to each
voter in the state, which certainly would not be unreasonable, his
expenses would have exceeded the amount which he has reported.
It may be argued that his efforts should have been directed to re-
publicans only. How is a man without a party list to know who is
a republican or who is a democrat ? The very best he can do, if he
wishes to reach the voters by letter, is to take the entire polling list
and address his communications to all voters regardless of their po-
litical persuasion.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Pbimaey. 93

CHAPTER XXI.
Wisconsin Has Lost Pkestige.

There were mafiy who believed that, by giving the people the
right to vote directly for their candidates at a primary election
the personnel of the officeholding class would be improved — that
the state would secure better officers, men of more ability and in-
fluence. This was urged as one of the reasons why the bill should
pass and become a law.

The results do not bear out this prediction. In 1903 Wiscon-
sin held a high place in the councils of the nation. In both houses
of congress Wisconsin men were found on the most important com-
mittees and no less than six chairmanships jvere held by members
of the lower house from this state. Representative Cooper was
chairman of the house committee on insular affairs; Babcock was
chairman of the District of Columbia committee; Jenkins was
chairman of the judiciary committee; Brown was chairman of the
committee on mines and mining; Davidson of the committee on
railways and canals; Minor was chairman of the committee on
expenditures of the interior department.

In the upper house, Senator Spooner was chairman of the com-
mittee on rules and a member of the committee on Cuban rela-
tions, the committee on finance, and the committees on foreign re-
lations and public health and quarantine. Senator Quarles was
chairman of the census committee and a member of the committees
on agriculture and fisheries, commerce, military affairs, public
buildings and grounds, and the special committee on transportation
and sale of meat products.

The fact that Wisconsin, one of the smaller states, standing
thirteenth in population and ninth in manufactures, should be ac-
corded six chairmanships in the lower house was a source of pride
to Wisconsin republicans. With but eleven members in the house
and six holding chairmanships of committees it was felt that the
standing of the state at the national capital was being well cared
for. And the committees headed by Wisconsin representatives were
not unimportant. The judiciary, insular affairs, and District of
Columbia committees were three of the most sought after posi-
tions in the house. The chairman of the judiciary committee, John
J. Jenkins, stood next to the speaker of the house in power and
prestige. The three remaining committee chairmanships held by
Wisconsin men, railways and canals, mines and mining, and ex-
penditures of the interior department, were none of them insignif-
icant.

In the senate the committee on rules, then held by Senator
Spooner, is the most important committee assignment that can be
given to a member of either house, and all of the other assignments

94 Political Reform in Wisconsik.

held by Senator Spooner were of a high grade. Senator Quarles
was the junior senator but his committee appointments were emi-
nently satisfactory considering the time he had spent in the upper
house.

Today Wisconsin holds btit one chairmanship in the house.
Representative James H. Davidson is chairman of the committee
on railways and canals. The successor to Eepresentative Jenkins,
the late head of the judiciary committee, is Irvine L. Lenroot, who
holds fourth place on the committee on ventilation' and acoustics,
a booby committee to which Wisconsin men have not heretofore
been assigned with one or two exceptions. Mr. Cooper has lost his
place on the insular affairs committee. Mr. Babcock's successor,
Arthur W. Kopp, is fourth on the committee on expenditures in
the state department, sixth on the committee on elections No. 1,
and tenth on committee on pensions. Eepresentative Esch, an old
member, continues to hold fairly good places on the committee on
interstate and foreign commerce and the committee on expenditures
on public buildings, and Davidson is on the committee on rivers
and harbors in addition to holding the solitary chairmanship al-
ready mentioned.

In the senate the senior senator. La Follette, holds practically
the same committee appointments held by the junior senator in
1903. The committee assignments of the senators in 1903 and
1909 may be compared as follows :

1903 — Senator Spooner, senior senator, chairman committee on
rules, member committees on Cuban relations, finance, foreign relations,
public health and national quarantine (special).

1908 — Senator La Follette, senior senator, chairman committee on
census, and member committees on civil service and retrenchment, cor-
porations organized in the District of Columbia, expenditures in the
department of state, immigration, Indian affairs, and pensions.

1903 — Senator Quarles, junior senator, chairman committee on cen-
sus, and member committees on agriculture and forestry, commerce, mili-
tary affairs, public buildings and grounds, transportation and sale of
meat products (special).

1908 — Senator Stephenson, junior senator, chairman of the commit-
tee on expenditures in the department of agriculture, and member of
the committees on claims, enrolled bills, Indian depredations, industrial
expositions. Pacific railroads, and public buildings and grounds.

In the lower house the comparison is still more unfavorable ^o
the state. While the present senators hold more committee as-
signments than did their predecessors, their labors will not be of
a character to overtax their strength, as meetings of most of the
committees are rarely held. In the house'' the number of com-
mittee assignments as well as the character of the committees to
which appointments are made, indicate a loss of prestige. Fol-
lowing are the assignments in 1903 and 1908, by districts :

First district, ' 1903 — H. A. Cooper, chairman of the committee on
insular affairs ; 1908 — H. A. Cooper, member committee on elections No.
3, and of the committee on foreign affairs.

The Evolution and Revolution or the Primary. 95

Second district, 1903— H. C. Adams, member of committees on agri-
culture and expenditures in interior department ; 1908— John M. Nelson,
member of committees on elections No. 3, Pacific railroads, and indus-
trial arts and expositions.

Third district, 1903— Joseph W. Babcock, chairman of committee on
District of Columbia and member of committee on ways and means;
1908 — Arthur W. Kopp, member of committee on expenses in state
department, committee on elections No. 1, and on pensions.

Fourth district, 1903— Theobald Otjen, member of committees on
foreign aJCairs, war claims, and Pacific railroads; 1908— William J.
Gary, member committee on District of Columbia and on expenditures
in navy department.

Fifth district, 1903 — William H. Stafford, member committee on post-
offices and postroads ; 1908— William H. Stafford, member of committee
on interstate and foreign commerce and committee on postofflces and
postroads.

Sixth district, 1903— Charles H. Weisse (democrat), member of
committees on private land claims and manufactures ; 1908 — Charles H.
Weisse, member of committee on private land claims and invalid pensions.

Seventh district, 1903— John J. Esch, member of committee on mili-
tary affairs and interstate and foreign commerce; 1908 — John J. Esch,
member of committees on interstate and foreign commerce and expendi-
tures on public buildings.

Eighth district, 1903 — James H. Davidson, chairman committee on
railways and canals and member committee on rivers and harbors ;
1908 — James H. Davidson, chairman committee on railways and canals
and member of committee on rivers and harbors.

Ninth district, 1903 — E. S. Minor, chairman committee on expendi-
tures in interior department, and member of committees on merchant
marine and fisheries and public buildings and grounds; 1908 — Gustav
Kuestermann, member of committees on liquor traffic, patents, and im-
migration and naturalization.

Tenth district, 1903 — Webster E. Brown, chairman committee on
mines and mining, and member of committee on Indian affairs; 1908—
Elmer A. Morse, member of committees on war claims, manufactures,
and private land claims.

Eleventh district, 1903 — John J. Jenkins, chairman judiciary com-
mittee ; 1908 — ^Irvine L. Lenroot, member of committees on patents and
on ventilation and acoustics.

This record tells the story of Wisconsin's fall from a leading
position at the national capital to one of little influence and less
honor. There has been an attempt at an explanation of this un-
fortunate development. It is said that "Uncle Joe" Cannon "has it
in" for the Wisconsin members because they chose to act independ-
ently, and refused to do his bidding.

Such an explanation is sheer nonsense. The Wisconsin mem-
bers were ignored because they have ceased to represent a party.
There is no political party in Wisconsin today. Each member rep-
resents an independent effort at the primary and the polls, and he
goes to Washington as an individual who has been elected on a
platform made by himself and presented to his constituents on the
stump or in the form of private campaign literature. The names
"republican" and "democrat" have no real meaning in Wisconsin
today. Even the members of congress make their own platforms

96 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

an^ stand on them, there being no conventions of party representa-
tives to perforin that duty. Each member of congress is a party by
himself, and he runs for office on his own individual merits and the
issues he may feel disposed to present to the people and talk about.
Is it any wonder that, when these men arrive in "Washington,
they are not given the best places on the committees of the two
houses? Were they republicans in a republican house of repre-
sentatives they could demand recognition and secure it, through
party influence, against the opposition of the speaker. He would
not dare ±o ignore ten republicans who came from a republican
state, elected on the republican ticket, running on a republican
platform. But he can well ignore ten individuals who made their
own platforms, coming from a state where political parties have
been abolished and candidates for office, instead of appealing to
the voter on party principles, follow the line of least resistence and
adopt the "anything to win" method of securing votes.

The Evolution and Kevolxition of the Pbimary. 97

CHAPTER XXII.
The Primary Law a Failure.

After four years of experiment with the Wisconsin primary
election law it is not difficult to point out many weaknesses and in-
adequacies that have become apparent in its operations. Even the
original primary election advoeateSj, those who were confident the
law would prove to be an automatic cure all for political ills, now
acknowledge that it must be amended. ■ They still contend that the
principle is sound; they merely propose to make certain changes
in the statute m order to give the principle an opportunity to do
its work.

Many voters who supported it after a four years' trial of the law
are tired of it. They do not believe the principle is capable of suc-
cessful application to the nomination of candidates for office.
There are many citizens who will not express an opinion because
they have been impressed with the belief that there is something
sacred about the direct primary election plan, and they are fur-
ther convinced that there is an overwhelming public sentiment be-
hind it. But there are enough who openly and unequivocally
condemn the law and the principle involved in it to indicate clearly
what informed public sentiment in Wisconsin now is on this sub-
ject.

Objections to the law are based on its failures to perform the
miracles its friends claimed for it and the positive disadvantages
and grave evils that have developed through the attempt to apply
the principle practically. In other words, it has failed signally
to effect reforms promised and it has brought forth a brood of
political and social abuses of the most serious character. Here are
a few of the more serious criticisms of the law as it has been de-
veloped in this state:

1. The personnel of the officeholding class has not been im-
proved ; better, more capable, and cleaner men have not been elected
to office; public officers are not more devoted to their duties; the
civil service is not improved by the appointment of a better class
of employes.

3. Public morals are not elevated by the change in the method
of making nominations. Never before in the history of the- state
was so much money expended by candidates in campaigns as at
present. Never before were there so many open charges of cor-
ruption and the unlawful use of money.

3. It has disorganized parties and built up personal political
machines.

4. The members of the state legislature are split up into fac-
tions and there is no party responsibility for their acts, which has

98 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

resulted in an endless amount of useless and some harmful legis-
lation.

5. The primary contests have engendered so much bitterness
that each election brings about a new alignment of personal politi-
cal machines.

6. Nominations at the primaries no longer represent the will
of the members of the parties making the nominations. The mem-
bers of the minority party invariably vote in the primaries of the
ma-jority party. Republican candidates with personal machines
make trades with democrats and socialists for votes in republican
primaries. Democratic leaders are hopeless, for they do not have
even the consolation of being at the head of a party that stands
for democratic principles, a respectable minority party.

7. Poor men and men of moderate means can not become
candidates for office under the primary election law when there
are contests, except on two conditions. They must face ruin or
accept money from others to defray their necessary expenses. If
they accept financial aid they assume obligations no public servant
should incur.

§. .The, electors can not "vote directly for the men of their
choice" at a primary election. They must vote for some man whose
name appears on the primary ticket, and that ticket is made up of
candidates who have circulated nomination papers or caused nomi- -
nation papers to be circulated. They may all be ofRceseekers and
objectionable to 90 per cent of the voters, but the voter must sub-
mit to make his choice from the self nominated primary candidates.

9. Never in the history of the state have the enmities en-
gendered by political contests been so bitter as they are today. All
pretense of the old good natured rivalry between parties has dis-
appeared from the political arena. Charges of unlawful use of
money, of a debauched public service, of actual bribery, of personal
dishonesty and political trickery were common during the last
session of the legislature.

10. Few, if any, intelligent men who take an interest in
politics can be found in the state who will not readily admit that
the law is not satisfactory and needs amendment. Changes have
been suggested at every session of the legislature since the law
was enacted, but no real remedy has been found.

11. While no attempt has been made to compute the entire
cost of the law 'in operation to the taxpayers of the state, counties
and cities, no one will for a moment dispute the truth of the state-
ment that it has been enormous and that no compensating benefit
has resulted.

12. The law gives a decided advantage to the man in office.
In the case of a United States senator or state officer where the
candidate must appeal to the entire electorate, the man who is
known to the people as the man in office is, has much advantage

The Evolution and Revolution of the Peimaey. 99

over the newcomer. The well advertised candidate, although he is
an inferior person, will get the nomination aver a less advertised,
but better equipped candidate.

13. The placing of names of candidates on primary tickets
by petition has developed a new industry in this state during pri-
mary campaigns — the circulation of petitions for hire. The party
clubs of former years have disappeared; in their places have ap-
peared the mercenaries who secure names on petitions for a con-
sideration. This is an exchange of patriotism for pelf.

14. The abolition of all conventions, county, district and state,
has deprived the. voters of parties of the opportunity to get together,
rub elbows and become acquainted. In conventions men from dif-
ferent sections of the state met and exchanged views. They ex-
plained the merits and abilities of the several candidates for office
and they made "trades" to the advantage of the party ticket in most
cases. The conventions were the schools of politics to which many
young men went for their education and they had an educative
value. All the advantages of this free intercourse and the exchange
of ideas and information disappeared with the abolition of the
convention.

15. The provision for making platforms in conventions made
up of candidates for office is a confessed failure. Platforms made
in that way do not represent the principles of the party, but are
mere "catch vote" aifairs. Even the candidates who make them do
not respect them, for they go out into the field with platforms of
their own, in many cases carefully prepared, printed and distributed.

16. The law has not dethroned the political boss. If we ever
had a real boss in Wisconsin before the primary law we have merely
changed bosses. Upon that feature of the question there is no
chance for* argument. The law complicates politics, and any law
that does this widens the opportunity for manipulation and in-
creases the activity of the boss. In fact, complicated politics require
leadership and political genius.

The shortest and most satisfactory solution of the primary elec-
tion problem as it is now presented can be incorporated in three
words : "Eepeal the law." But something is needed, to take its place.
For ten years before the primary election law now in force was pre-
sented to the legislature in 1901 the Wisconsin lawmakers had been
experimenting. They had developed through the evolutionary
method what was known as the Milwaukee primary or caucus and
convention law. There was no pretense on the part of any Mil-
waukee citizens, whether actively interested in politics as candidates,
public officers, or committeemen, or among private citizens whose
sole interest was good government, that the Milwaukee primary law
did not furnish adequate protection to the elector in the exercise
of every right to participate in the management of the affairs of

100 Political Reform ix Wiscoksjk.

his party, if lie belonged to a party, and in the nomination of its
candidates for office.

Under the Milwaukee primary law the members of parties voted
directly for the nomination of all candidates for local offices and
for delegates to city, county, district, and state conventions. In
other words, within the territory in which they were, or could be,
acquainted with the characters and qualifications of candidates they
nominated by a direct vote. When the territory embraced in a
district was so large that there was a doubt of the ability of the
voters to choose intelligently, they selected representatives in whom
they had confidence to meet in party conventions and act for them.
This was in accordance with the principles of representative gov-
ernment, the only kind of government possible in a countr^' like
ours.

Under the Milwaukee law, also, the candidates were placed on
the primary ticket at preliminary meetings which were' open to all
members of the party and any name proposed as that of a fit man
to become a candidate for office or for a place on a delegation would
be received and placed on the primary ballot. In this way can-
vassing for signatures to nomination papers was avoided an^d the
expense incidental to such a canvass was made unnecessary.

Under the Milwaukee law candidates for office who were to be
nominated by a direct vote of the electors did not have large dis-
tricts to canvass and it was not necessary for them to organize
personal machines and hire mercenaries to aid them in their primary
campaigns. They did not deem it necessary to fill columns of the
newspapers and cover acres of billboard space with glaring adver-
tisements of their virtues and qualifications for the offices they were
industriously seeking.

Where a district was larger than a township or ward, candidates
were required to lay their claims before representatives of the voters
in a party convention. Members of other parties could not partici-
pate in the business before the convention. It was a family matter
conducted by members of the family of voters. Independent Aoters,
dissatisfied members of the party, and members of other parties
were given an opportunity to express their approval or disapproval
of the nominations made and platforms adopted when the time
came to elect or defeat the candidates nominated, but the nomina-
tions were made by the members of the parties and no others — a
most wise provision.

Under the Milwaukee law when candidates were nominated by
party members there was order and system as well as party responsi-
iDility. Party committees and clubs aided in the election of party
tickets. Whatever money was required to carry on the campaign
was expended largely by party committees in the interests of the
entire ticket. Political clubs were organized in the wards, made up
of citizens who cherished no personal political ambition and whose

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primary. 101

sole aim was the promotion of party success and the triumph of
party principles. They held meetings, discussed public questions,
exchanged opinions, and devised measures for the advancenient of
the interests of the party in the local field. Young men who became
members of these clubs and who attended party conventions as dele-
gates, having won the confidence of their neighbors, were in this
way given a liberal education in the principles of government. They
gained experience, a knowledge of men, and a familiarity with pub-
lie affairs that can be atta;ined only by meeting, and mixing with
other men who are equally interested and patriotic. Their minds
were broadened, their acquaintance multiplied, and their ability
to become useful citizens increased by their political activities. Now
that political clubs and conventions have been abolished in this
state there is no place for the young business and professional man
in politics except as an officeseeker or a mercenary attached to some
personal political machine.

While there were complaints under the old system that the best
man was not always nominated and that, at times, parties were not
always wisely governed, there was not one fault, found with that
system that has not been exaggerated beyond all reason in these days
of political disorganization.

In addition to repealing the primary election law and re-enact-
ing the Milwaukee caucus and convention law of 1899, steps should
be taken to provide for a limit to expenses that may be incurred
by candidates seeking nominations. This may well be done when
candidates are nominated by conventions made up of delegates rep-
resenting large districts or territories. In the old days it frequently
occurred that candidates were nominated who had not spent one
cent to advance their own interests. John C. Spooner was nomi-
nated three times for the United States senate and he did not spend
money to secure either the nomination or election. Where candi-
dates are nominated by a direct vote in a strict party caucus or
primary — in what is known as a closed primary — as was done under
the old Milwaukee caucus and convention law in the case of all
local officers, the expenses may be limited to a reasonable amount.

But, under the Wisconsin primary election law now in force
there is an element of injustice in putting up an office, at auction
and then denying candidates the right to bid in the open. A candi-
date for a state office must have a wide acquaintance, must be
favorably known — or well known, in any eventr— in order to stand a
chance of success. If he be not well known in advance he must make
himself known through a campaign of publicity. This can be ac-
complished in but one way— he must spend money and spend it
liberally.

What right has a state to enact a law by which long, arduous,
and expensive campaigns are made necessary if the candidate shall
hope to win, and then provide a limit of expenses that makes such

102 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

a campaign impossible, or at least impractical? The state has no
right to tempt its citizens to spend money and then brand as a cor-
rupt practice the act it has itself invited. The state should be con-
sistent. Having put its offices up at public auction it should abide
by the consequences or adopt a new system. It has no right to say
that only men of wide and intimate personal acquaintance in con-
gressional districts may hope to be nominated for congress, denying
to men of limited acquaintance in the district the right to make
themselves and their ability known to the voters.

In a convention such a man would have a fighting chance — or
his friends in the convention from his home county would at least
be able to present to the delegates his claims and make them ac-
quainted with his qualifications, if he be well qualified for the posi-
tion. In the primary election he would not even have a chance to
fight against another man who had sold horses or bought hogs all,
over the district and who could call a majority of the voters by their
Christian names. What right has the state to make it necessary to
spend money to win a nomination and then deny the candidate the
privilege of spending money ?

And yet a limit to such expenditures must be fixed. Here is a
primary election paradox. To leave the law as it is merely puts a
premium on corruption. To amend it would deprive worthy men
of all opportunity of becoming candidates for office with a prospect
of success unless they were widely known in advance. And there is
still another reason why the amount of money that may be expended
in seeking office should be limited. Only men of wealth can afford
to seek, or accept, office solely for the honor attached to positions of
trust and confidence. Men of moderate means invite ruin when
they expend large sums to secure a public office. Many men have
been utterly ruined by offieeseeking and officeholding. If the cost
of getting office be increased or maintained at its present figure in
this state, corruption and graft will follow as a natural consequence.
There is no escape from this conclusion. There is no call for the-
ories, for eloquent generalities, for appeals to popular prejudice in
this emergency. The use of cant phrases such as "special interests,"
the "right of the people to a direct vote," and* "fundamentals of
government" is all well enough in its place, as is also the use of the
terms "progressive" and "reactionary" to distinguish those who
favor or are opposed to the Wisconsin primary law as it is, but cant
is not what is needed in this state at the present time.

Wisconsin is confronted by a condition, clearly defined, unmis-
takable in character, and demanding amendment at the earliest pos-
sible moment. The columns of the newspaper press have been full
of the details of this condition for months. Business and profes-
sional men, politicians and private citizens, farmers, artisans and
laboring men are all aware of the situation and wondering what is
to become of the state.

The Evolution and Revolution of the Primary. 103

There is but one way to escape the evils that are threatening and
•that is to bring to bear on the members of the legislature enough
pressure to cause them to make the necessary changes in the method
of nominating candidates. They will not do it without pressure.
There is a popular superstition that the direct primary is a sacred
institution. It has had a mighty conjure spell thrown about it.
It is demonstrably a failure, but thousands are as afraid of it as
they are of a haunted house or a cemetery at midnight. The mem-
bers of the legislature will not touch it until they are forced to do
so and the only power that can force them is the voters.

The law is bad. It should be changed or repealed. To do so
will not be a step backward as some will claim, but a step forward,
just as much so as it is to repeal any other bad law. There is noth-
ing sacred about it. It is only a pretty theory that does not work
out in practice. The friends of constitutional government should
make the question an issue in every legislative district. The fact
that some politicians still cling to it as a parent does to a wayward
child should not deter the movement for its repeal. Those who have
brought themselves into political prominence by agitating it have
been rewarded. In other words, they have been settled with. If
they wish to continue in the public service they should come for-
ward and aid the people in wiping out a colossal blunder. This is
a splendid opportunity for them to demonstrate to the people that
they have a higher regard for the public welfare than their own
selfish interest. What the people should now do is to fix up their
election laws in a way that will guarantee constitutional govern-
ment and thereby perpetuate our republican institutions.

PART TWO.

TAXATION REFORM IN WISCONSIN.

CHAPTER I.
Need of Reform Recognized.

The history of taxation legislation during the first fifty years
of Wisconsin's experience as a state is one of constant effort to patch,
amend, and stretch the original taxation system, adopted by the
founders of the state, to fit new conditions constantly arising. When
the state was first organized and admitted into the union the cost of
administering the public business was comparatively insignificant,
and the task of apportioning the expenses of administration among
the taxpayers was not a difficult one. A general property tax, cov-
ering, as it did, real and personal property, was sufficient for the
needs of the state, and, as both real and personal property were for
the most part tangible, the work of placing a value upon all property
was one about which there could be no serious controversy.

But that condition did not continue long. The last half of the
nineteenth century was a period of transition from the old to the
new. Our grandfathers lived the simple life ; they transacted their
business in the simplest possible manner; they had neither great
wealth nor extensive fields of operation ; their plan of taxation was
as simple as their private business, and it answered their purposes.
Their successors changed all that. They built railroads, telegraph,
telephone, and electric car lines. They organized great corporations
doing business in every state in the union and in foreign lands. They
borrowed millions of capital and invested it in industrial pursuits.
They changed the entire financial, commercial and industrial sys-
tems. Incidentally, they amassed great wealth, a large proportion
of which was of a character that made tax evasion easy. In point
of fact this class of property termed "intangible" by the economists,
could only be assessed when it was declared by the' owners them-
selves, as there was no way in which the assessing officers could dis-
cover and value it.

As the evolution of the business world progressed the efforts to
adjust the taxation system to the new conditions became more per-
sistent and earnest. Tax reform was not a political issue at any
time during the fifty years that closed the last century, nor has it
been a real political issue since. There have been differences of
opinion, it is true, concerning specific measures designed to remedy

104

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 105

existing inequalities of tax burdens, but there has never been a
political party, a faction of a party, or any considerable number of
citizens who were opposed to any measure that was demonstrably
a reform or an improvement of the taxation system.

During the last decade there has been considerable newspaper
space devoted to the subject of taxation and political speeches made
in this state have bristled with charges of conspiracy to evade taxes,
but there has been no real issue at any time. The work of tax re-
form, or the improvement of the taxation system, began years ago,
before there was any talk of a "reform administration" of state
affairs. Governors, members of the legislature, and private citizens
all took part in the discussion and all were apparently animated by
a sincere desire to find a workable solution of the problem. That
they did not succeed in speaking the final word on the subject is not
their fault, nor would it be just to charge up more recent failures
to the account of the present generation of reformers. They have
been doing what they could, but the balance on the credit side of
their ledger would have been greater if they had been less cocksure
of the efficacy of -their remedies and less severe in their criticismf
of others who offered suggestions.

One of the most fruitful sources of inequality and injustice in
the taxation system grew out of the old practice of undervaluation
common throughout the state. In this practice the state set a bad
example, which was followed by the counties, towns, school dis-
tricts, and individuals in turn. Under the old law the state was
supposed to levy a tax of one mill on the dollar of valuation for
common school purposes, and the state board of equalization, esti-
mating about how much money the common schools would require,
fixed the valuation of the state to fit the one mill school tax. For a
number of years prior to the change in the system the valuation of
all property in the state as arbitrarily fixed by the state board of
equalization, was approximately $600,000,000.

County boards of supervisors, believing the state board of equali-
zation would be influenced by the valuation of property in the
county as established by the county committee on equalization of
assessments, vied with each other in keeping down their assessed
valuations. Township officers, in their efforts to evade as much as
possible of the state and county taxes, caused the undervaluation of
property and assessors who had sworn to assess all property at its
true valuation, violated their oaths. Individuals, encouraged by the
example of the state, county, and township officers, contended for
still lower assessments and ended by making false reports of the
amount of their personal property, in some cases leaving out a large
percentage of that property entirely.

But, while the contest to shrink assesse values to the minimum
was a sharp one, there were localities where it was impossible to
follow the popular custom to the limit. In many cities of the state

106 Political Refor.m in Wtsconsiw.

the necessity of making public improvements required that a fair
rate of assessment be established and as little property be permitted
to escape taxation as possible. In many of those municipalities the
real estate assessments represented from 60 to 70 per cent of the
actual market value of the property, while the average in the rural
districts was in- some cases as low as 20 per cent, or less of the real
value.

This resulted in unequal tax burdens and complaints were filed.
The law required the taxation of mortgages, but it was ignored be-
cause the owner of the mortgage, believing that mortgage taxation
was double taxation if the property mortgaged was taxed at its full
value, evaded the tax. Owners of stocks and bonds, representing
in most cases property that was already taxes, refused or neglected
to report their "intangible" assets to the assessor and thus another
large class of values, assessable under the law, failed to appear in
the assessment rolls.

In this way the work of educating the property owning public
in the gentle art of evading taxes went on from year to year. John-
son's excuse for evading his taxes was that Robinson evaded his.
Brown knew that Jones had not reported his mortgages and refused
to list his own bonds, while Schmidt hid his watch when the assessor
made his rounds because Smith's parlor organ had been overlooked.
Certain conscientious citizens refused to swear to the valuation
placed by themselves on their personal property because they knew
it was too low, and yet if they reported it at its true value they would
be paying more than their fair share of the taxes.

And yet all this time the tax reformers were busy wij;h the laws
in their attempts to find a remedy for the manifest evils that were
so prominently noticeable in the system. Few' laws were passed at
every session of the legislature and old laws were amended or re-
pealed. The courts were appealed to time and again and judicial
decisions were added to the complicated mass of literature which the
student of the subject of taxation was called' upon to wade through.
In an article printed in The Milwaukee Sentinel on March 28,
1897, K. K. Kennan reported that there were 889 Wisconsin Su-
preme Court decisions bearing on tax questions. No attempt has
been made to compute the number of bills introduced in the legis-
lature or the number of measures passed relating to taxes and
taxation, but they unquestionably run up into the thousands.

But the remedy was not found because the methods employed
(vere inadequate and futile. No systematic attempt was made to
establish a system of taxation, the efforts being confined to the work
of piecing and patching, to stretching and contracting, to boring
holes here and filling holes there, to lopping off in one place and
adding on in another. Many of the new laws were contradictory.
It was difficult to find two amendments that harmonized with each

Taxation Reform ii? Wisconsin. ■ 107

other, 'and the courts were kept busy construing the conflicting pro-
visions with the hope of bringing order out of chaos.

The members of the AVisconsin legislature were, however, travel-
ing a path that would lead them to results later on. Or, it may be
more accurate to say, will lead them to results, for, while great im-
provement has been made, the end sought has not been attained as
yet.

One of the first, if nj3t the first, efforts to shake down the chaotic
mass of taxation laws into some semblance of a system was made in
1873, when State Senator F. W. von Cotzhausen of Milwaukee in-
troduced bill No. 46S, entitled : "A bill to provide for the collection
of certain statistics with a view to more fully equalizing the state
taxes."

The immediate inspiration for the introduction of this measure
was the filing of a large number of petitions asking the legislature
to repeal the laws exempting church and other property from taxa-
tion. A committee was appointed, of which Senator Cotzhausen
was chairman, to consider the matter, and they worked industriously
in their efforts to determine the value of the property the exemption
of which was complained of. Incidentally it occurred to the com-
mittee that it would be a wise plan to have a commission appointed
to prepare for the legislature such statistics and other information
relative to property in the state as would be of use in framing taxa-
tion laws. The bill was passed, but on March 10, 1873, Gov. Wash-
burn returned it with his veto to the senate, explaining that the
expense of gathering the statistics would be great, and that they
would not be reliable when gathered, as the actual value of property
could not be ascertained by examining the records of sales, the con-
sideration named in the deed being in many cases merely nominal.
"A consideration of $1 named in a deed will pass the title as well
as $10,000," said the governor.

Manifestly, the governor was mistaken in this instance, as it is
to the sales records of real estate that all authorities now go to make
comparisons between assessed and actual values, leaving out of con-
sideration as a matter of course all transfers where there is any
reason to believe the real purchase price is hot named in the deed.
But, however mistaken Gov. Washburn may have been, there was not
enough sentiment behind the movement to pass the bill over his veto
and it was permitted to drop for the time being.

At the next session of the legislature, 1874, Assemblyman Os-
born revived the matter by introducing pint resolution No. 18A,
which was worded as follows :

"Resolved by the assembly, the senate concurring, that the governor
designate three suitable persons to revise the laws for the assessment
and collection of taxes, and whose duty it shall be to report to the next
session of the legislature within five days after the commencement of
the session."

This resolution was introduced on Jan.. 39, 1874, and indefi-

108 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

nitely postponed by the assembly on Feb. 35, 1874, on report from
the committee of the whole. It will be remembered that the assem-
bly that year was made up of reformers — progressives they would
be now called — as the election of 1873 had been carried by the
grangers, {their majority in the assembly being overwhelming. Gov.
William E. Taylor had been elected to succeed Gov. Washburn and
a clean sweep had been made of the lower house, the republicans
holding the senate by a majority of one.

No one will accuse the granger majority in the assembly of
conspiring fo defeat taxation reform legislation. It was simply
and solely inability to grasp the needs of the situation that defeated
the resolution. Marvin Osborn, the author of the resolution, was
elected to represent the First district of Rock county. He was a
republican and a farmer. Had the granger assembly seen fit to pass
his resolution the work of revision would at least have had a begin-
^ning. As it was, it was delayed for twenty-three years.

Taxatton Reform in, Wisconsin. 109

CHAPTER II.
Fight for Tax Commission Begun.

To K. K. Kennan, the Milwaukee attorney, is due more than to
any other one man the credit for giving Wisconsin a tax commis-
sion. There are good people in Wisconsin who in the innocence
of their hearts believe that whatever advancement has been made
in taxation reform should be credited to the administration of Gov.
La PoUette, but this is an exaggerated estimate of the services ren-
dered to the state in this particular field of activity by the present
senior United States senator. That he contributed to the result by
his sensational, if belated, agitation of the subject of taxation legis-
lation doubtless is true, but it was (a) the creation of the tax com-
mission and (b) the work of the tax commission that brought about
a revision of the law§ and the establishment of a new system of ad-
ministering the laws under strict supervision by the commission, that
in reality accomplished results.

Mr. Kennan began his work for the creation of a commission in
1889, at which time a bill dravm by him was introduced in the as-
sembly by Peter Leonard of Price county. This bill was No. 383A.
It was considered by the committee on assessment and collection of
taxes and, on- March 39, was reported for indefinite postponement.
Later it was considered in committee of the whole, from which
body it was reported without amendment on motion' of Henry E.
Legler, representative from the Seventh Milwaukee district. The
bill was indefinitely postponed on March 30, 1889.

The history of the introduction of and work for this measure is
an interesting one. Mr. Kennan, its author, was then tax commis-
sioner of the Wisconsin Central railroad company and for several
years he had been acquiring practical experience in the operation
of the Wisconsin tax laws. The company he represented owned
large tracts of land in the northern part of the state, where new
counties were being organized. It was natural, therefore, that the
inadequacies — ^to put it mildly — of the system should strike him
forcibly, as his time was spent in efforts to straighten out tangles
resulting from the ignorance or prejudice of local taxing ofBeers
and the uncertain meaning of the laws themselves. He believed
that, if a commission of competent men were employed to compile
statistics relating to the taxes collected, together with facts con-
cerning the operation of the laws, the inequalities and injustice
necessarily attending upon the enforcement of the illogical, con-
flicting and uncertain statutes by taxing officers with elastic con-
sciences, the consequence would be a speedy attempt to remedy the
defects in the system that would surely be pointed out. To this
end he prepared an address which he delivered before the committee
to whom the consideration of the bill was assigned. Considerable

110 Political Refor>[ in Wisconsin.

time was spent by him as a member of the "third house," lobbying
for the passage of the measure. The net result of his work was
encouraging, although the bill failed of passage. The seed was
planted, but it did not bear fruit until eight years later.

In 1891 and 1893 Mr. Kennan was out of the state, but the
work was not entirely neglected. At the legislative session of 1891
Assemblyman H. J. Desmond, who represented the First Milwau-
kee district, introduced by title a bill to create a commission to in-
vestigate the taxing system. This action was taken after consulta-
tion with several members and the bill was introduced by title only
as the last day for the introduction of new business had arrived
and there was no time to prepare the measure. Nothing ever came
of the effort as the bill was never even drawn.

In 1893 John Kingle of Wausau, member of the assembly from
Marathon county, introduced bill No. 439A, providing for the ap-
pointment of one commissioner to make a thorough investigation
of the subject of taxation and report his eoriblusions to the legis-
lature at the next biennial session. Mr. Ringle- was himself well
acquainted with the assessment and taxing system and he was also
familiar with the fact that there was a large and spreading dis-
content among taxpayers. He had served several terms in county
offices where he came in direct contact with the taxpayers and noted
the justice of many of their complaints.

Mr. Eingle's bill passed the assembly, but was defeated in the
senate. The vote in the assembly was 74 to 12, in spite of the fact
that the committee on "retrenchment and reform," a body created
by the democratic legislators to help them make a good record
while in control of the state's affairs, was opposed to the passage
of the measure. The names of such men as the present governor,
J. 0. Davidson, W. H. Austin," Henry Hagemeister and A. R. Hall
appear among those of members who voted for the bill when it came
up in the assembly for passage. The measure failed of passage in
the senate.

In 1895 Mr. Kennan, who had returned to the state from Eu-
rope, again took up the work of education, as it may be called. When
the legislature convened he appeared at Madison with the draft of
a new bill similar to the one introduced in 1889 by Assemblyman
Leonard. The proposed law was made to combine so far as was
possible the best features of commission laws enacted in other
states, and carried an appropriation of $6,000 annually to pay the
expenses of the commission.

This bill was introduced in the assembly by William O'Keil of
Bayfield county and the work of securing its passage was vigorously
pushed. It was introduced on Feb. 13, 1895, and referred to the
committee on assessment and collection of taxes. On April 10 it
was reported by the committee with amendments of a minor char-
acter, and again, on April 12, other minor amendments were re-

Taxation Reform ix Wisconsin. Ill

ported, all of which were adopted on April 16 irnder suspension
■of the rules. The bill was passed the same day by a vote of 63 to 15.

In the senate journal this bill, No. 604A, is an elusive subject.
So imperfect is the record that it would be necessary to read the
entire journal from cover to cover to correct omissions in the index
and history of bills; and even then it may be found that the daily
records of the proceedings are at fault, and not the index.

In the "History of Bills," which is supposed to be a complete
abstract of all proceedings with respect to each bill. No. 604A
is thus reported :

"No. 604A, a bill authorizing the appointment of a tax commission
and appropriating a sum of money therein named. Received from assem-
bly 777; assessment and collection of taxes, 777; concurrence recom-
mended, 782 ; laid over 789."

Here tlft story stops, as the index does not show any further
action except two conflicting entries, as follows : "Eecalled from
assembly, 826 ; returned from assembly, 636." This last page num-
ber should read "836," as the action referred to really appears on
that page and not on page "636." This ends the recorded action of
the senate on one of the most important measures considered that
session.

But the assembly journal record would indicate that there was
really something doing with the bill after all. On page 1139 of
that journal there appears a message from Walter L.-Houser, chief
clerk of the senate, to the effect that the "senate has refused to
concur in 604A," and other bills.

Mr. Kennan was of the opinion that the appropriation carried
by the bill was the cause of its defeat, as the income of the state
at that time was so moderate that the legislature was disposed to
"cut corners" more closely than is the practice in this day of largely
expanded resources. But the fight for the measure was a warm one
and the record of the vote in the assembly showed that it was popular
in that house. It is unfortunate that the vote in the senate can
not also be found.

113 Political Refok.m l\ Wisconsin.

CHAPTER III.
Temporary Tax Commission Created.

The statute authorizing the appointment of the first tax com-
mission was enacted by the legislature of 1897 and signed by Gov.
Edward Scofield. The bill, No. 345A, was drawn by K. K. Ken-
nan, and introduced by Assemblyman Merriman of the Third Rock
county district on Feb. 9, 1897. It was referred to the committee
on assessment and collection of taxes, consisting of N. B. Treat,
chairman, Wynn Edwards, Albert R. Hall, King S. Staples, Charles
Polacheck, Horace IST. Polly, and Herman Schellenberger. On
• March 24 this committee reported the bill for indefinite postpone-
ment and two days later it was indefinitely postponed with a large
batch of other bills that had been condemned by the committee.

This action would have disposed of the bill permanently had
not its friends determined to make any concession necessary in order
to secure the establishment of a commission. The bar to its passage
was still to be found in the appropriation clause, and Mr. Kennan,
having seen his work in previous years all brought to naught by this
one obstacle, determined to -win at any cost and informed the mem-
bers that he would undertake to raise by private subscription the
money required to pay the members of the commission for their
work if they would amend the bill by cutting out the appropriation
and pass it. His offer was accepted.

The day following the indefinite postponement of the bill it was
restored to the calendar on motion of W. H. Plett of Lincoln county
and recommitted to the committee on claims. On March 31, this
committee reported by its chairman, George H. Ray of La Crosse,
recommending that the bill be amended by striking out section 8,
the section containing the appropriation provision. The amend-
ment was adopted and the bill passed without a call of the roll.

The bill was then messaged to the senate where a few "minor
verbal amendments were made and it was then passed by a vote of
20 to 8, as follows :

Yeas — Senators Baxter, Davis, Dennett, Devos, Green, Lamoreaux,
Mailer, McGillivray, Mills, Putnam, Riordan, Roehr, Solliday, Stebbins,
Stout, Thayer, Welton, Whelan, Whitehead, Woodworth, 20.

Nays — Senators Austin, Burke, Fisher, McMullen, Pierce, Phillips,
Whitman, Withee, 8.

Absent or not voting— Senators Conger, Mayer, Munson, and You-
mans, 4.

This brief statement of the facts relating to the passage of the

bill and the creation of the first tax commission does not give even

the shadow of an idea of the amount of work required to win success

even at that late date, when the subject of taxation had been under

debate for mere than forty years with no hope of settlement or

even reasonable progress under existing conditions. It was ac-

Taxation Refokm m AVisconsin. 113

kiiowkdged that "something must be done." There was no dispute
over the proposition that the laws must be changed and an attempt
made to adopt an orderly and reasonable system of assessment and
collection of taxes for the support of the government.

And yet it was impossible to secure the enactment of a law that
would entail expense upon the state for the prosecution of the work
of investigation that must necessarily precede any legislation along
reformatory lines. Even A. E. Hall, the man who had talked mjost
frequently and vehemently about the failure of the railroad com-
panies to pay their just proportion of the taxes, was a member of
the committee in the assembly that reported the bill for indefinite
postponement. On the other hand. Senators Eoehrj Whitehead,
Green, Devos and Riordan, as well as Assemblyman Eay and others
who were subsequently held up to public scorn as men who were
opposed to the equalization of tax burdens, were the men who gave
Mr- Kennan most effective and persistent aid in his efforts to secure
the enactment of the law.

After its passage through the two houses the bill went to Gov.
Scofield shorn of its appropriation clause and the governor made
no secret of his determination to send it back without his approval.
He frankly stated that he would not be put in the position of asking
men competent to perform so important a work for the benefit of the
state to give their time and pay their own expenses while in the
state's service. He wanted a commission; he believed the taxing
system should be reformed; his sympathies were all with the pur-
poses of the measure. But he felt that the law as it stood placed him
in a false position and he did not purpose going out on a begging
tour in the interests of the state asking such important service gratis
of any of its citizens. He believed the state should be willing to pay
the cost of doing the work devolving upon a commission of this
character.

In this emergency Mr. Kennan came to the front again with a
letter to Gov. Scofield, which is reproduced here as it was the means
of saving the bill from death by veto. This letter has never before
appeared in print, but it is of so much historical value that no
apology is required for inserting it in full in this review.

Madison, Wis., April 24, 1897.
"His Excellency, Edward Scofield, Governor.

"Dear Sib: In reference to bill No. 354A, a few words of explana-
tion may not be out of place.

"This bill was drawn by me in 1889 and an effort was made to com-
bine in it the best features of several similar bills which had become
laws in other states. The compensation for the commissioners proposed
in this original bill was $6,000. In spite, of hard work on the part of
myself and others the bill failed to pass— 'probably on account of the
appropriation. Similar bills were proposed in 1891 and 1893, but I was
absent from the state and no great effort was made to secure their
passage.

"In 1895 Mr. O'Neil of Bayfield introduced a bill which was the
same as the present 354A, except that it provided for an appropriation

114 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

of $6,000. This bill passed the assembly by a vote of about 63 to 15, and
was concurred in by the senate; but in the confusion of the last day it
was recalled by the senate and died there.

"No 354A, as originally introduced, provided that the commissioners
should be entitled to such compensation as the governor should deem just
and reasonable. When it became evident that the bill could not be
passed with this provision, or, indeed, with any provision calling for an
appropriation, I assured certain members that if it could be passed with-
out an appropriation I was satisfied that there would be no difficulty in
raising the necessary funds for a commission of voluntary contributions
of taxpayers of the state.

"In giving this assurance I was not speaking at random, but only
made the statement after I had conferred with a number of business
men of large means who promised me that the money would be forth-
coming when needed.

"Of course, it is possible that there are public spirited men of ability
who would serve on such a commission without compensation ; but there
is a great amount of clerical work which ought to be done in securing
and classifying statistics, etc., and my estimate of the amount needed for
clerical work, stationery, postage and traveling expenses is $1,500. A
much larger sum could ibe used to advantage but this is the minimum
sum compatible with anything like thorough and efficient work.

"As to the pay of the three commissioners I estimate (on a basis of
200 days' work, say 100 days for the chairman and 50 days each for the
other two members) that $2,500 to $3,000 would be sufficient to secure
the services of men of such special fitness and high standing that their
report would be of great and permanent value.

"While it is hardly practicable to do much within the next three
days, I am confident that, before the first of June (the time set for the
appointment of the commissioners) I can present you with a satisfac-
tory guarantee that the funds needed for the commission will be forth-
coming.

"As you are no doubt aware, there are many features of our present
taxing system that are unsatisfactory, and there is a popular demand
that some practical measures should be taken to simplify and improve
our present laws.

"The interests involved are enormous. We raise in this state over
$15,000,000 in taxes annually and there are many intelligent men who
believe that the best interests of the state require that this great sub-
ject, which affects the pockets of every taxpayer in the state, should
receive more attention than is ordinarily given it by the legislature.

"It seems to me that if the taxpayers of the state want a tax com-
mission bad enough to put their hands in their pockets and pay for it,
they should have the privilege.

"Hoping that you will see your way clear to sign the bill, I remain,

"Very respectfully yours,

(Signed) "K. K. KENNAN."

With this assurance in hand. Gov. Seofield signed the bill and it •
became Chapter 340, laws of 1897, and he appointed Burr W. Jones
of Madison, K. K. Kennan of Milwaukee, and George Curtis, Jr.,
of Merrill as commissioners. The first meeting of the commission
was held on June 10, 189.7, in the office of the secretary of state,
at which time Burr W. Jones was elected chairman and K. K.
Kennan secretary of the «ommission.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 115

CHAPTER IV.
Work of the First Commission.

Mr. Kennan was as good as his word, for he raised by private
subscription the money required to pay the expenses of the com-
mission. It can not be said that the commissioners were paid for
their work, but their clerk hire, postage, and traveling expenses were
probably all provided for, and, with the exception of Mr. Kennan,
himself, some contribution toward remuneration for time expended
was also made. As secretary of the commission, Mr. Kennan pre-
pared the statistical appendixes which fill something like 100 pages
of the report transmitted to the legislature in 1899 and which rep-
resents a vast amount of research work as well as compilation of
tables, analyses of figures, and preparation of explanations and con-
elusions that must have taken much time. These tables are today
of incalculable benefit to the student of the history of taxation in
Wisconsin, as in many cases the figures contained therein can be
found in ho other place.

The main portion of the report to the legislature was prepared
by the three commissioners, Messrs. Jones, Kennan, and Curtis.
It is a book of 276 pages and is fille'd from cover to cover with im-
portant and valuable information. All three members of the com-
mission were lawyers of ability and they brought to the task of com-
piling and explaining laws that made up the taxing system of this
state trained legal minds. The system was analyzed, its weak
points uncovered and pointed out, and suggestions for improvement
in the method of assessing property were made. As the report it-
.self is available to the student it is unnecessary to go into details
here with respect .to its contents.

Meanwhile there were others who were studying the subject with
equal interest and it became apparent that a united effort would
be made to correct one of the most serious defects in the existing
system — undervaluation. The general belief that the corporations
— railroads, express, sleeping car, telephone, and telegraph com-
panies were not taxed at their true value was spreading and having
its effect. It became apparent to thoughtful men that the assessed
valuation of all classes of property in the state would be raised with
a consequent increase in the amount of money collected in the form
of taxes.

But a mere increase in the revenues of the state was not the end
sought. Tax equalization, the collection from all classes of prop-
erty of an equal amount of taxes to be used in paying public ex-
penses, was the aim of all the men who originally labored to bring
about a change in the taxing system. Should the taxes upon one
class of property be increased, it was necessary that there be a
corresponding reduction elsewhere in order that real tax reform be
attained. While not publicly stated in definite terms, this idea had
run through the minds of every man, private citizen and public

116 PoUTiCAi. Refokm in \Visco?;sin.

official alike, who had contributed to the work of preparing for a
change. It is safe to say that, had it not been understood that the
uncovering and assessment of large blocks of personal property and
the proposed increase in corporation taxes would result in a de-
crease in the taxes on "real property, there would have been no pub-
lic interest in the movement. It was equalization of taxes that
interested taxpayers, not increased revenues.

While the tax commissioners were working upon the task set
for them. Gov. Edward Scofield began to look into the other phase
of the problem, the receipts and disbursements of the state. On
February 21, 1898, The Milwaukee Sentinel printed an article pre-
pared by the governor on -the state finances which contained a clear
explanation of the sources of revenue and the manner in which the
money was expended. The governor explained that it was a diffi-
cult matter to make a statement of this character because of the
peculiar system of bookkeeping then in force in the state depart-
ments. As a matter of fact, there was no uniform system of ac-
counting, the books in each department being kept independently
of those in every other department. Gov. Scofield's article was the
first clear explanation of the state's financial standing ever pub-
lished, and it may be added that it was also the last. Of course,
the reports of state officers are regularly printed in book form and
may be examined and understood by citizens who are familiar with
the business of the state, but the average layman, even a book-
keeper, will find some difficulty in comparing the figures from the
several departments and arriving at a satisfactory understanding
of the financial affairs of the state.

As a result of his investigations in the business departments.
Gov. Scofield proposed two changes in the business methods of the
state. He was himself a business man and could not see any reason
why a balance could not be struck at any time that would show
clearly and accurately the financial condition of the state, as well
as the condition of each department that handled funds belonging
to the state. Also he believed the legislature should be informed
as to the probable needs of the state institutions at the beginning
of each session in order that the appropriation might be made
intelligently.

With these ideas in mind he proposed two reforms : A central
system of accounting and the preparation of a budget to be pre-
sented to the legislature at the opening of each session. Having
worked out his plans, he took steps to carry them into effect. He
prepared a budget on his own motion. He ascertained from the
several boards the probable needs of the institutions over which
they presided; estimates were made of the probable expenses of
the state departments for the coming biennial term; the resources
of the state for the same period were given artd the legislature was
shown how, if the expenses were to be kept within the limits of the
state's income, it would be necessary to cut some of the appropria-

Taxation I{EFOR^r in Wisconsin. 117

tions, or levy a tax to make up the deficiency. This budget was
incorporated into the governor's' message.

Another feature of the message was the proposition to estab-
lish a simplified central system of accounting. Gov. Scofield did
not criticise past administrations for what he considered to be
the uabusiness-like methods of keeping the state's accounts. On
the contrary, he explained that "with the practice of changing
bookkeepers with each change of administration it has been deem-
ed impractical for any secretary of state or state treasurer to un-
dertake, in the few years in which he holds office, to improve the
system." But, he said: "I believe the time has come when the
state bookkeeping should be revised and simplified. It is possible
the change can not be accomplished without extra help, as the
bookkeepers in the departments named are kept fully occupied. I
recommend, therefore, that the legislature consider the question
of authorizing the temporary employment of one or more experts to
take up the subject with the secretary of state and state treasurer
and formulate a new system." He then explained at some length
the inadequacies of the existing method. While he believed the
state to be something more than a business enterprise, he still main-
tained that the business of the state in the transaction of which
over $3,500,000 was handled annually, should be cojjducted on
business principles.

When the legislature of 1899 convened, the report of the tax
commission was presented for the consideration of the membfers
of that body. As has been said, this report is available to any one
who wishes to investigate in detail the work of the commission, but,
for the purposes of this review the recommendation of the com-
mission alone are of enough importance to bear reproduction here
in an abbreviated form. As a preface to their summary of principal
recommendations the commission said:

"In presenting the following recommendations the members of the
commission desire to express their regret that the time and means at
their disposal were insufficient to enable them to elaborate any general
or comprehensive plan for revising and improving the whole -taxing
system of the state. The vast extent and importance of the subject and
the practical difficulties which stand in the way of any far reaching
reform can hardly be appreciated by those who have not made a special
study of the subject. While the work of the present tax commission
falls far short of what its members had hoped to accomplish, and will
probably be disappointing to many, it is at least a step in the right
direction and may form a basis for more effective worlc along the same
lines hereafter. For reasons which are stated in the introduction to
this report no attempt has been made to draft laws embodying the recom-
mendations noted below. If any of them meet with legislative approval,
it will be a comparatively easy task to put them into the form of laws.'

1. The commission recommended that town taxes, exclusive ■ of
state, county and school, be limited to 2 per cent of the assessed
valuation.

2. Recommended that subdivision 13 of section 776, revised stat-
utes, which conferred powers of villages on towns in certain cases, be
repealed.

118 PoLiTiCAr. IlEFOEir IN Wisconsin.

3. That the law authorizing the collection of a poll tax be repealed.

4. That, with a view to preventing and remedying undervaluation

by assessors, the general reassessment law be amended so that a reassess-
ment can be compelled when under-valuation is shown, without proof
that injustice on inequality has resulted and without liability to costs.

5. That the time for preparing the tax roll and turning it over to
the treasurer be extended in towns and villages to the third Monday
in December ; that the time for collecting the taxes be extended to
March 1 — the town and village treasurer being authorized to charge 5
per cent from and after February 1 to March 1 — and that no extension
after March 1 be granted.

6. That the entire administration of the tax laws be placed in the
hands, or at least under rigid supervision of capable and disinterested
agents of the state, to be chosen and to have such tenure of office and
compensation as to make them virtually free from the influences of
political or popular favor or displeasure and enable them to give their
entire time to official duty ; such agents to consist of a state board or
officer and such subordinate or district officers as may be necessary.

7. That an inheritance tax be levied with respect to personal prop-
erty on both lenial and collateral inheritances, at the rate of 1 per cent
on the former and 5 per cent on the latter, with' the exception of $10,000
in the case of lenial and $200 in the case of collateral inheritances ; the
revenue to be paid into the state treasury.

"8. Corporations. "

"Our work has led us to the conclusion that all the corporations
which are taxed on the basis of earnings or on a mileage basis ijay
relatively less taxes than other persons and less than they would pay
on the basis of value.

"For the reasons stated in the report we are not prepared either to
recommend that the system of taxation be changed to the method of
assessment by a state board or to decide as to the specific rates of taxa-
tion which should be fixed if the present method should be continued.

"(a) We recommend that the whole subject of taxation of quasi-
public corporations be fully investigated either by a committee or by a
board of state officers having full power to examine witnesses and com-
pel the production of books and papers.

' "(b) We recommend that if the present system of taxing railroads
be continued a new and closer classification of rates be fixed for the
purpose of preventing the inequalities which arise under the system now
in force.

"(c) That the present plan of taxing railroads on the basis of mile-
age be discontinued.

"(d) That express companies be taxed either on the basis of value of
their property in the state, including the franchise, to be assessed by a
state board or on the basis of their gross earnings.

"(e) That legislation be adopted preventing the evasions of the law
as to taxation, by sleeping car companies."

There were therefore, before the legislature when it convened,
the report of the temporary tax commission, and the two proposi-
tions contained in Gov. Scofield's message — to establish tlie prac-
tice of presenting a budget at the opening of every legislative ses-
- sion and to reform the bookkeeping methods of the state. While the
two latter propositions were not, strictly speaking, taxation matters.
they related to state finances and were by their nature so closely
associated with the subject of taxation that they should be con-
sidered at the same time. There were also presented in the as-
sembly alone during the session of 1899, fifty-three bills relating
to taxation.

Taxation Kkiokm in Wisconsin. 119

CHAPTER V.

Permanent Tax Commission Created.

, That there was no real controversy at any time, concerning the
necessity of tax reform in this state is fully established by the his-
tory of the bill creating the permanent tax commission. As has
been said, there were differences of opinion as to the steps to be
taken to bring about that reform. There always had been opposi-
tion to the license fee system of taxing railroad property. Suits
had been instituted immediately after the passage of the law in
1854 providing for the taxation of railroads under the license fee
system and from time to time down to the final return to the ad
valorem system in 1903 attempts were made to enact laws making
the change. Senator von Cotzhausen in 1873 and 1874 made a
fight in the legislature for a restoration of what he termed a
"constitutional system of taxation." State Senator J. V. Quarles
made another fight in 1881 for the same cause. Assemblyrrtein
Hall had several times introduced bills and resolutions calling for
an investigation into the subject. The proposition to increase tlie
taxes of quasi-public corporations such as sleeping car, express,
teleplione and telegraph companies had been discussed at length.
As has been shown, the attempt to create a tax commission had
been fought over for ten years before 1899. ' But in all this con-
troversy there was more dispute as to the method and plan to be
adopted in reforming the taxing system than over the fact that
such a reform was needed.

The bill creating the permanent tax commission in 1899 in-
dicated, by the manner in which it was handled, that at least one
point of controversy had been satisfactorily disposed of. The work
of the temporary commission, paid by voluntary contributions from
taxpayers, was of a character to convince the members of the legis-
lature that it was worth while to supplement the efforts of Messrs.
Jones, Kennan and Curtis by continuing the investigation into the
subject along similar lines. The services of the commission had
cost the state nothing ; the members of that body had not been able
to devote their entire time to the work of investigation, -Ijut their
report contained so much information of positive value that the
advocates of taxation reform were eager to take up the task where
the first commission laid it down and proceed with the matter in a
businesslike manner.

Bill No. 356S, 1899, was introduced in the senate by the com-
mittee on assessment and collection of taxes, Senators Whitehead,
Thayer and Riordan, and referred to the joint committee on claims
on March 30, 1899. April 11, the bill was reported from the com-
mittee on claims by Senators Baxter, McGillivray and Weed, with-
out recommendation. This action was probably requested by the

120 POMTIOAL RBI'OKM IW WISCONSIN.

originators of the bill as on the same day the committee on assess-
ment and collection of taxes introduced a substitute bill.

April 13 Senator McGillivray moved to amend the substitute
by making the time which the commission was to serve two years,
instead of ten, as provided in the bill, but he later in the day with-
drew his proposed amendment. The substitute bill was then adopt-
ed and the bill was passed under suspension of the rides on mo-
tion of Senator Eoehr. The vote was unanimous, twenty-nine
senators voting for the bill, four being absent. They were Sena-
tors Ejyidson, Thayer, Whelen and Whitman. But three days
were requir'ed for the passage of the bill after the committee re-
ported it and the substitute was introduced.

In the assembly the work was performed with almost equal ex-
pedition. It was messaged over to the lower house on April 13,
and, having already been considered by the committee on claims,
it was "read first and second times and placed in regular order on
calendar." The following day Assemblyman A. E. Hall requested
that it be referred to the committee on assessment and collection
of taxes, which was done. That committee consisted of A. E.
Hall, chairman, and Assemblyman H. 1^. Policy, P. A. Orton, T.
J. McGrath, W. A. Barber, Thomas McDonald and John McGreer.

April 18, four days later, this committee reported the bill
back with the recommendation that it be concurred in, and on the
same day Mr. Hall called up the bill with the unanimous consent
of the assembly. Mr. Hall then moved to suspend the rules and
put the bill on its passage. The motion was carried and the bill
was passed by a vote of 62 ayes, 15 nays, 23 absent or not voting.
Those voting aye were:

Assemblymen Adams, Anderson, Baldock, Barber, Barlow, Becker,
Buffingtoo, Catlin, Dengel, Dodge, Eline, Flaherty, Fogo, Frost, Galaway,
Germer, Gilmore, Grootemaat, Hall, Harvey, Holland. Hurlbut, Hum-
phrey, Ives, Jensen, Johnston, Keene, Logan, McDonald, McGrath,
McGreer, McLeod, Minch. Moor, Morse, Mosher, Olson, Qrton, Parker,
PoUey, Richardson, Rowell, Rusk, J. Ryan, M. W. Ryan, Sarau, Schoen-
baum, Slade, Sneddon, Sturdevant, Thiesenhusen, Thomas, True, Vander-
cook, Wells, Wheeler, Williams, Wylie, Zinn, and Mr. Speaker (George
H. Ray).

Noes — Assemblymen Buttles, Cashiu, Daggett, Dahl, Evans, Feige.
Guth, Hartung, Holcomb, Johnson, Kempley, Lang, Loth, Soltwedel.
and Willott.

It was clear from this action of the two houses of the state
legislature that there was no political issue relating to taxation re-
form in this state in the year 1899. The people of the state, as
well as the members of the legislature, were practically united in
the desire to bring about needed changes in the laws. There were
some differences of opinion as to what changes probably would be
made, or ought to be made, it is true, but these differences were
purely and solely between individuals — there M'as no organization
for or against any plan for amending the existing laws.

Taxation Refobm in Wisconsin. 121

The work of education along this line had been going on for
years. Cotzhausen, Quarles, Kennan, Hall, Whitehead, Orton, Ein-
gle, the members of the first tax commission, and members of com-
mittees in the two houses of the legislature had contributed their
part to the educational campaign. Gen. Benjamin Harrison had, on
Feb. 22, 1898, delivered an address in Chicago on the subject of tax-
ation that was widely copied and read with deep interest. The
Milwaukee Journal devoted column after column — at times whole
pages — to this subject, and it received full credit for its efforts.
In point of fact, the years between 1876 and 1900 were full of
tax reform talk and the discussion was fruitful of results. '

Let no one man attempt to monopolize the credit for what was
accdmplished in these busy years of taxation reform. As has been
said K. K. Kennan, by his early advocacy of the commission plan
of solving the problem and his untiring, efScient services as a mem-
ber of the first commission, is probably entitled to more credit than
should be given to any other one citizen. He was the pioneer and
he continued in the work until the permanent commission was
appointed. He made sacrifices that no citizen should be called
upon to make to his state, because they were really unnecessary, and
of late years a strenuous effort has been made to ignore his work
and minimize his services and those of others who were instru-
mental in working out the problem — so far as it has been worked
out.

It is not best to leave this particular period without first clear-
ing up for the benefit of the reading public the record of the begin-
nings of taxation reform in Wisconsin. This is necessary because
extravagant claims have been put forth and widely believed that
are not borne out by the facts. In the Voters' Handbook, a polit-
ical pamphlet circulated in the campaign of 1903 in the interests
of the then state administration, this statement is found on page
sixty-eight :

"The first man in the state of Wisconsin, indeed, in tUe whole country,
to take the public platform and lay hold of the question of taxation "in
such a broad, comprehensive and fearless way as to arouse general atten-
tion was Robert M. La Follette. Assailed violently by that portion of the
press which takes its orders from the railway lobby, but could neither
deny his facts or answer his arguments, he held firmly to. bis course.
His voice was heard in every part of the state, ringing clear and strong
above the storm which beat upon him alone. It is an easy matter to
espouse a cause if a majority are for it. It is not difficult then to be wise
with tardy counsel or brave with petty criticism. But it tries the iron
in a nature to lead in advance of all support year after year in a losing
fight against all odds. It tests the wisdom and judgmelit of statesman-
ship to determine when and how to wage contest against great corpora-
tions which cdntrol legislation, against the allied political machine of
state and county organization, against a press which is subservient to its
master."

As evidence of the truth of this statement the assertion is made
that Mr. La Follette delivered an address before the Tower Hill

122 Political Reform iiv Wisconsin.

Chautauqua, in which "he discussed the relation of corporations to
legislation, their power in government, exercised through the lobby
on senators, members and executive, in controling action on taxa-
tion and other important questions affecting the interests of the
people." It is a well known fact that Mr. La Follette did deliver
an address at the time and place mentioned, in the summer of 1897.
During the session held the previous winter the legislature had
created the temporary tax commission composed of Bur^^JV^. Jones,
K. K. Kennan, and George Curtis, Jr. The spectacle of Mr. La
Follette standing like Ajax defying the lightning would be an in-
teresting one if it were a fact that he was the only man in the state,
"indeed, in the whole country," who was interested in the subject
of tax reform. But Jones, Kennan, and Curtis, none of them a
candidate for office, it should be remembered, were devoting their
time to a practical study of this question at the time when Mr. La
Follette is represented as sending his clarion voice over the state,
"ringing clear and strong above the storm which beat upon him
alone."

And, as a matter of fact, Mr. La Follette's chaulauqua address
was not devoted to taxation. It was an attack upon the corpora-
tions. It was, in effect, his Ann Arbor speech, or, to speak more
accurately, the Ann Arbor address was a modification of the Fern
Dell speech, a toned down, polished, adapted address made to fit
and fill the ears of xiniversity students. The Fern Dell speech was
delivered before an audience made up largely of farmers and it was
designed to fire their blood and cause them to rise in. their wrath
and sweep the corporations into their proper places. This was to
be accomplished by sending delegates to the next state convention
who would help to nominate Mr. La Follette for governor.

But there was little about taxation in that speech, or either
of them. Mr. La Follette had not made an exhaustive study
of the subject at that " time. Even in 1901, when he became
governor of the state and wrote a message which he read to the
legislature with great dramatic effect, he had not formed any well
defined opinions on the subject of taxation, and so far from gather-
ing his strength for a mighty effort and, alone and unaided, push-
ing the "storm" which had "beat upon him alone" over into an-
other state or out into the ocean beyond, he mildly advised the
members of the legislature to be careful, informing them that,
according to figures furnished him by the bureau of labor and in-
dustrial statistics, "the railroad companies had been fairer than
the average individuals, who, as to the great mass of personal pro-
perty assess themselves."

So far from being the only man in Wisconsin to take an inter-
est in the taxation reform movement in that particular period,
Mr. La Follette was probably the least important factor in that
movement. It will be remismbered that there was no subject of

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 123

discussion that excited so much public interest during the interval
between the legislative session of 1897 and 1899. There was no
political issue, it is true^ but there was a warm debate as to the
wisdom of steps already taken and the character of future efforts
along the same line. One of the most fruitful causes of debate was
the action of Gov. Scofield and the legislature of 1897 on the ex-
press and sleeping car taxation bills passed by the latter in the
closing hour of the session and vetoed by Gov. Scofield on con-
stitutional grounds.. The newspapers were full of the discussion;
editorials were written by the editors of newspapers all over the
state and private citizens wrote letters to the press expressing their
opinions on the subject.

124 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE VI.
The Express and Sleeping Cae Tax Bills.

The history of the bills about which there grew up an acri-
monious controversy in 1898 is an interesting one. No. 139 A. "An
act to define express companies and to prescribe the mode of
taxing the same, and to fix the rate of taxation thereon;" and
jSTo. 619A, having for its object the levy and collection of a tax in
the form of a license fee on palace, drawing room and sleeping car
companies, were introduced by the Hon. J. 0. Davidson, then a
member of the assembly and now governor of the state, in Jan-
uary, 1897. The record of one of these bills will serve the purposes
of this review, as they were both successfully urged for passage
and both met the same fate.

No. 129A, was introduced oy Assemblyman Davidson, Jan.
38, and referred to the committee on assessment and collection of
taxes, in which committee it remained until March 36, when it was
reported back with an amendment. On March 30, Mr. Davidson
himself offered an amendment in the form of a substitute, which,
together with the bill was laid over until the following day.

When the matter came before the assembly the next day, As-
semblyman Latta attempted to have the bill and substitute re-
ferred to the committee on assessment and collection of taxes, but
his motion was defeated by a vote of 14 yeas to 74 nays, which
shows that the measure was a popular one in that house. The sub-
stitute was then adopted and the bill as amended was ordered to
engrossment and third reading.

On April 9, both committees having reported the bill correct,
the measure was passed by a vote of 83 yeas to 3 nays, the mem-
bers voting "no" being Assemblymen Latta, Polley, and Utt.

On April 18 bill No. 139A was messaged over from the assem-
Ijly to the senate and referred to the committee on state affairs
and on the fifteenth it vf&s reported for concurrence with an
amendment. The next day it was rereferred to the committee on
state affairs which body considered it until April 30, when an
amendment in the form of a substitute was reported and recom-
mended for passage.

On April 81, the amendment first submitted by the committee
on state affairs was considered and rejected because a more satis-
factory form of amendment had been incorporated into the sub-
stitute bill prepared by the same committee. The substitute was
adopted and the bill ordered to third reading. The following day
the bill was read a third time and concurred 'in without a call of
the roll.

The measure was then messaged back to the assembly and on
the same day the senate amendment in the form of a substitute

Taxatiox Kei'ohm in Wisconsin. 125

was concurred in on a division of the house. The roll was not
called. All this occurred on the last day of the regular session,
April 24, 1897, and both houses adjourned the same evening, to
meet again in special session later for the purpose of adopting the
revised statutes then in the hands of the revision committee.

The express company tax bill went to Gov. Scofield with other
measures passed*during the closing hours of the session and was
signed by him. This last statement is an important one in view
of subsequent events. That the governor signed the bill may not
generally be known, but such is the fact. It is probably that, if
the file of original bills in the office of the secretary of state were
examined, the express and sleeping car tax bills would be found
with Gov. Scofield's signature attached, but with a line drawn
through it.

Gov. Scofield erased his signature when he found that the bills
had been irregularly passed. While they were still lying on the
governor''s desk, M. J. Jeffris of Janesville encountered Walter
Houser, chief clerk of the senate, in the capital park. Houser re-
marked that the governor had made a mistake, or had got himself
"into a hole," or something to that effect, and Jeffris asked for
particulars. He was, informed by Houser that the express and
sleeping car bills which had been signed by the governor had been
irregularly passed and would be declared void by the courts.

Mr. Jeffris, believing the governor was entitled to a knowledge
of the facts, immediately called at the executive chamber and in-
formed Gov. Scofield of his interview with Houser and the nature
of the statements made by that officer. The journals of the two
houses were sent for and it was found the statements were correct.
The roll had not been called on either bill. Gov. Scofield then
erased his signature from the original bills.

It' would be unprofitable and a waste of valuable space to
attempt to explain in detail why Chief Clerk Houser felt justified
in concealing from the governor facts in his possession, of- the im-
portance of which he was fully conscious, and to a knowledge of
which the governor was entitled. The Wisconsin factional war
had not at that time become general in its scope or openly bitter
in its character. The La Follette faction, to which Houser be-
longed, was unfriendly to Gov. Scofield, it is true, but that would
not excuse an employe of the senate in deliberately concealing from
that body and from the governor important facts that, kept secret
until it was too late to correct the mistakes, would invalidate two
of the most important measures passed by the legislature during
the session. *

But, while Walter Houser's motives may not definitely be'
known, it is a significant fact that the two taxation bills referred
to were made the principal issue by the faction opposed to Gov.
Scofield's renomination in 1898. An attempt was made to con-
vince the people of Wisconsin that Gov. Scofield was opposed to

126 Political Kefobm in Wisconsin.

taxation reform, or, at least, to the adequate taxation of corpora-
tions. It is possible that even at that early date campaign material
may have been, in the eyes of the leaders of the rapidly increas-
ing "progressive" faction, of more importance than wholesome
legislation, even when that legislation was sorely needed and ex-
pected by the people of the state.

The character of the campaign literature required is illustrated
by the following quotation from the pamphlet, "Gov. Scofield's
Kecord, as Shown by His Official Acts," page 20. This pamphlet
has previously been referred to. It has published "by direction
of the Republican club of Milwaukee county" and professes to give
the record of a republican governor. Referring to the votes of the
express and sleeping car taxation bills this republican club said:

"These vetoes were sent to the legislature at the adjourned session,
when it met solely for the purpose of taking action upon the revised
statutes. Many members at that time did not return, and the governor
knew that no bills could be introduced except by permission under a
.ioint resolution of both houses, and a three-fourths vote of all the mem-
bers in either house in favor of such resolution. When it is remembered
that the governor stated to the author of these bills, the Hon. J. O.
DttvUtxni, before any constitutional question was raised that he would
veto them; that before vetoing them he was in extended conference with
'Bob' Luscombe, the lobbyist against them; that if he asked for any
opinion of the attorney general, no opinion upholding his veto was ever
given by that official; that at this time he was using the free passes of
these corporations, what is the inference we must draw from the fact
of these vetoes?"

As a sufficient answer to the first of these charges the follow-
ing letter from Gov. James 0. Davidson to the writter of this re-
view will suffice.

"My Dear Sir — I have your favor of August 9 and note carefully
your inquiry with reference to the following quotation from your letter :
The governor (Scofleld) stated to the author of these bills, the Hon. J.
O. Davidson, before the constitutional question was raised, that he should
veto them.'

"In reply permit me to say that I have no recollection of any such
conversation between Gov. Scofleld and myself.

"I am, very truly yours,

"J. O. DAVIDSON."

Gov. Davidson is credited with having an excellent memory.
His private secretary. Senator Munson, says the governor has the
best memory for facts and details of any man he has ever
known. It was M. G. Jeffris with whom Gov. Scofleld was in
consultation before vetoing the bills, not "Bob" Luscombe. That
incident already has been explained. It was lawful and the custom
for officers to use passes at that time.

Having erased his signature from the bills, Gov. Scofleld on
April 26 wrote a veto message which explains itself and which sub-

[Note — ^The lines in italics are printed with underlining rules in the
original pamphlet to add emphasis to the statement.]

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 127

sequently became the subject of heated controversy. That mas-
sage in full is as follows :

"State op Wisconsin,

"Executive Office, Madison, April 26, 1897.
"To the Honorable the Assembly:

"I have the honor to return herewith, without approval, bill No.
129A, originating in the assembly, entitled 'An act to define express com-
panies, to'prescribe the mode of taxing the same, and to fix the rate of
taxation thereon.'

"The bill is returned for the reason that it failed of proper enact-
ment. In its passage there was disregarded the very explicit direction
of the constitution, that in the passage in either house of the legislature
of any law which imposes, continues, or renews a tax * * * the
question shall be taken by the yeas and nays, and three-fifths of all the
members-elect to such house shall in all cases be required to constitute
a quorum.'

"To approve a measure so plainly and vitally defective would be to
invite litigation and subject the state to unnecessary expense.

"I desire to call your attention to the importance of this measure,
and also to that of bill No. 619A, and to urge upon you the necessity of
properly enacting both bills before the adjournment of this session.

"If we are to maintain in this state a righteous system of taxation,
it is necessary that we see to it that the large corporations doing busi-
ness within our borders and receiving without discrimination or stint
the full protection of our laws shall not escape paying their just share
of the expenses of government.

"Respectfully,

"EDWARD SCOFIELD,
"Governor."

When the legislature met in August to receive the report of
the committee appointed to revise the statutes, these bills came up
again. But a controversy immediately arose between the two
houses as to the best method of handling the matter. The senate
proposed to reintroduce the bills and pass them in a manner that
would dispose of all doubt as to the regularity of the proceedings ;
the assembly proposed to pass them over the governor's veto. The
friends of the measures in the senate contended that even were the
bills passed notwithstanding the governor's objection, the irregu-
larities in the first passage would not be cured and the enactments
would still be unconstitutional. In their opinion, it was best to
remedy the faults found in the proceedings by the governor and
not attempt to override his opinion. For these reasons the propo-
sition to pass the bills over the governor's veto was defeated in the
senate by a vote of yeas 17, nays 13. The record shows that several
of the senators that later became strong partisans of Gov. Scofield,
and who were then friendly to him; although there was no open war
being waged on him at the time, voted in favor of the motion to
disregard his veto, but the two-thirds majority was not 'secured.
The vote was as follows :

Yeas — Senators Baxter, Conger, Dennett, Fisher, Green, Mailer,
Mayer, McGillivray, Munson, Putnam, Roehr, Solliday, Stout, Whelan,
Whitehead, Withee, and Woodworth — 17.

128 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

Nays — Senators Austin, Lamoreaux, McMullen, Mills, Pierce, Pliil-
lips, Rlordan, Stebbins, Tbayer, Wilton, Whitman,- and Youmans — 12.
Absent or not voting — Senators Burlje, Davis, and Devos.

In the assembly, A. E. Hall was the leader of the members who
were in favor of passing the bills over the governor's veto, and he
succeeded in carrying his point. Mr. Hall was one of the best, if
not the best, parliamentarians in the legislature, but he was not a
lawyer. In his opinion the objections urged by the governor to the
manner in which the bills originally were passed were not well
taken, or he believed that the action he proposed would cure the de-
fects pointed out. At all events that was the course he proposed
and the one the assembly elected to follow. When the senate refused
to stand by the assembly, however, it became necessary to adopt
other measures.

After the senate voted down the motion to pass the bill notwith-
standing the objections of the governor, Senator Green of Mil-
waukee" introduced a joint resolution designed to cover the case.
This resolution and the action taken upon it are important, as it
clears up many disputed points in the history of the measures. It
was introduced by Senator Green the day the attempt to pass the
bills, over Gov. Scofield's feto failed, Aug. 19, 1897, and was as
follows :

"Joint resolution No. 83S.

"Resolved by the senate, the assembly concurring. That Senator
Munson be permitted to reintroduce the two bills vetoed by the governor
relating to the taxation of sleeping car and express companies.

"First, a bill to define express companies and to prescribe the mode
of taxation thereon.

"Second, a bill to provide for the taxation of owners and lessees of
parlor cars, drawing room ears, and sleeping cars.

"The communication from his excellency, the governor, in regard to
these bills calls your attention to the importance of these measures, and
also the importance of enacting these bills before the adjournment of
this session. The passage of these bills in a correct and legal manner
does away with the Objections of his excellency, the governor, and will
then, without doubt, meet with his approval."

This resolution passed the senate by a vote of 38 yeas to 2
nays, Senators Youmans and Lamoreux voting against it, while
Senators Burke and Davis were absent. It is clear from this that
there was no disposition on the part of the senators, with the ex-
ception of the two who voted against the resolution, to oppose the
passage of the measures in a legal manner, and Gov. Scofield was
pledged by the language of his veto message to sign them were
they legally passed.

But there was trouble in the assembly. When the joint resolu-
tion came up in that body the same day, it was met with proposi-
tions to amend, to substitute another resolution, and to delay, not-
withstanding the fact that the session was about to close. Mr. Hall
proposed a new resolution in the assembly authorizing Mr. David-
son to introduce two entirely new bills, whereas the senate resolu-

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 129

tion provided for the reintroduction of copies of the identical
bills that already had been favorably acted upon by the two houses.
There ought to be no question of the passage of the old bills ; there
was grave question whether new bills would receive the support of
enough members of the two houses to pass them. This was one mis-
take by Mr. Hall.

Another mistake was in attempting to change the title of the
bills so as to avoid the necessity of calling the roll, which change
was to be efiEected by leaving out the words "tax" and "taxation"
entirely. Mr. Hall's resolution was defeated, yeas, 28, nays, 53.

Mr. Bay then introduced a resolution, "that Mr. Davidson be
permitted to introduce a bill to license express companies and a bill
to license owners of drawing room cars, sleeping cars, and palace
cars." This resolution was adopted by a vote of 53 yeas to 33 nays.

Assemblymen Stone and Hall then attempted to have the senate
joint resolution amended, Mr. Stone proposing to substitute Mr.
Davidson's name for that of Senator Munson, and Mr. Hall de-
manding that all except the paragraph allowing Mr. Davidson to
introduce two bills be stricken out. Both of these motions were
lost. The senate resolution was then concurred in by a vote of 81
yeas to 1 nay.

All of this maneuvering cost time and time Vas an essential
item, a fact clearly demonstrated by the failure of the bills to pass
a second time. So much time was wasted that it was too late to
work them through after the resolution was passed. All other
work of the session had been completed; there was nothing to do
but pass these bills, and the members scattered to their homes with-
out taking action on them. When the promoters of the movement
to re-enact them found the way cleared for the bills there was not a
constitutional quorum present and the whole matter was dropped.

In 1899 the express and sleeping car tax matters came up again
in the form of bills introduced by the senate committee on assess-
ment and collection of taxes. There were, in fact, four bills, later
known as the "Whitehead bills," as follows :

No. lOOS, providing for an ad valorem assessment for taxation
purposes of express companies.

No. iOlS, providing for a similar tax on sleeping car compa-
nies.

No. 103S, for the taxation of freight line companies.

No. 103 S, for the taxation of equipment companies.

All of these bills were prepared by the senate committee on as-
sessment and collection of taxes, of which Senator Whitehead was
chairman. It is a peculiar fact that, while the permanent tax
commission had not yet been created and the plan for making an
ad vaJorem assessment of corporation property had not yet been
perfected, these bills, the first of the kind ever drawn in this state,
have required little amendment since they were enacted into law.

Another important point with respect to these bills was the fact

130 Political Reform m Wisconsin.

that there was no opposition to thein in either house of the legisla-
ture. Had taxation been an issue at that time, it is not reasonable
to suppose that four taxation measures could be presented to and
passed through both houses of the legislature without opposition.
The bills were introduced Feb. 9, 1899, and passed through the
routine course of such measures, finally coming up for passage in
the senate on March 28. The roll was called and thirty-two votes
were recorded in favor of all of the measures, one senator Fred
Dennett, being absent.

When these measures came up in the assembly they were re-
ferred to the judiciary committee, consisting of W. G. Wheeler, P.
A. Orton, L. J. Eusk, L. M. Sturdevant, Charles M. Catlin, A. W.
McLeod, Gr. E. Vandercook, L. C. Harvey, W. E. Hoehle, George
Ela, Francis Eline. This committee reported a few verbal amend-
ments and the bill then went to the committee on assessment and
collection of taxes made up of the following assemblymen: A. E.
Hall, H. N". Policy, P. A. Orton, T. J. McGrath, W. A. Barber,
Thomas McDonald, John McGreer. This committee also recom-
mended verbal changes.

On March 38 the bills, as amended, passed the assembly, all
members present voting in the aifirmative. There were 75 votes
for the bills and none against them. Not much controversy there !

The bills then went back to the •senate and the assembly amend-
ments were concurred in by a unanimous vote of all senators pres-
ent. They then went to Gov. Scofield, who signed them, and they
became chapters 111, 112, 113, and 114, laws of 1899.

These were all "progressive measures," but they were not writ-
ten by the men who afterward -adopted the title of "progressive,"
nor did they receive their main support from that class of legis-
lators. By common consent Senator Whitehead's name was given
to all four bills and the laws after they were passed were called the
"Whitehead tax laws."

And these taxation reforms were accomplished without opposi-
tion at a time when Eobert M. La Pollette is pictured as standing
grandly and courageously for tax reform while the storm of opposi-
tion beat upon him alone. The truth is not always heroic or melo-
dramatic, but plain common sense teaches that one ounce of truth is
worth more than a ton of melodrama when historical accuracy is de-
sired. In political campaigns, however, heroics cut an important
figure at times. They have loomed large in Wisconsin politics during
the last ten years.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 131

CHAPTER VII.
The Discussion Becomes More, General.

The facts related demonstrate conclusively that the subject of
taxation was not a political or factional issue at that time. In
point of fact, it would appear from the record that, so far as the
heed of taxation legislation was concerned-, the legislature was
practically a unit. If any member was to blame for the failure to
re-enact the two bills mentioned at the adjourned session of the
legislature in 1897 that member was Mr. Hall himself, one of
the most active, enthusiastic, and sincere taxteformers of that pe-
riod of the state's history. But Mr. Hall was not particularly
friendly to Gov. Scofield; he had opposed his nomination the pre-
vious year and his action in the assembly clearly indicates that it
was his wish to take from the governor as much as possible of the
credit due for the enactment of this important taxation legislation.

It is true that, in the campaign of 1898, Gov. Scofield was
mercilessly attacked and criticised for vetoing the two measures
referred to. An attempt was made to show that the bills in ques-
tion were not tax measures and that, therefore, his constitutional
objections did not apply. They even -went farther and asserted
that "if the charges which the supporters of this legislation bring
against the governor are true, then he is the victim of, or a party
to, the greatest conspiracy to defraud the people in the history of
the state."

Furthermore, it should be remembered that the language quoted
was used in a pamphlet attack upon Gov. Scofield, not in an effort
to enact taxation legislation. The records of the legislature, the
messages of Gov. Scofield, the columns of the newspapers of the
day may all be searched in vain for evidence that there was a po-
liticd:! issue or a factional division on the subject of taxation legis-
lation. There were differences of opinion with respect to the
character of the legislation to be enacted in some cases, but in the
case of the two bills mentioned there was no such difference that
was worthy of consideration. The bills were carelessly passed, it is
true, and the irregularities were, in the opinion of the governor,
who approved of the purpose and form of the two bills, of sufficient
gravity to make them of doubtful constitutionality. He urged
that they be regularly and lawfully passed. The failure to follow
his suggestion was due to a mistake by Mr. Hall, who miscalcu-
lated the amount of time that might be wastfed in playing politics
without endangering the passage of the measures.

It was during this period that the factional dispute that was to
break the republican party of Wisconsin into two rival camps had
its first violent outbreak — an unsuccessful one, by the way. But
the dispute was not one of principle, or measures for the public
good. It was purely a personal matter. The issue as a personal

132 Political Reform in WiscoifsiN.

issue as well. It was under the leadership of Bobert M. La Follette
and it was made up of the radical members of the party. Its ob-
ject was to advance the political fortunes of Mr. La Follette. Inci-
dentally some of the men who enlisted in his cause expected po-
litical advancement for themselves. There were no real issues that
could be appealed to to win support, so they invented issues.

Up to the time of the adjourned session of the legislature of
1897, at which the two bills in question failed of passage because
of Mr. Hall's ill advised delays and obstructive motions, Mr. La
Follette had never mentioned the subject of taxation in any of his
public addresses. He never visited the statehouse during the four
years Gov. Scofield s^ved as the state's executive; he never ap-
peared before a legislative committee in favor of tax legislation or
legislation of any character. With a few noteworthy exceptions,
the men who later joined the La Follette faction were men whose
conspicuous inactivity in public life was their one distinguishing
characteristic.

Meanwhile, as has been shown, the first tax commission had
been appointed for the purpose of investigating the subject and
making recommendations to the legislature of 1899. The first
attempt adequately to tax the express, sleeping, parlor, and draw-
ing room car companies had, like many first attempts along new
lines of legislation, failed through no deliberate fault of its pro-
moters and not because of any opposition on the part of enemies, to
be taken up at the next session of the legislature and put through
without opposition. Already a movement was on foot to increase
the taxes of insurance companies and the impression was gaining
ground that the railroad companies would soon be required to in-
crease their annual contributions to the state treasury. And all
this had been accomplished without a campaign, without making
the subject an issue. It had been accomplished because the general
public, men in public life and private citizens, were becoming •dis-
satisfied with the old, crude, illogical system of general and personal
property taxation that had been in force since the admission of the
state. This dissatisfaction was manifested, as it had been in the
past, by the number of taxation bills introduced at the legislative
session of 1897, there being seventy-four bills in the assembly and
fifteen in the senate, all relating to taxation.

But there were other tax measures presented for the considera-
tion of the legislature in 1899 about which there was more difEer-
ence of opinion than the ones already noted. Two bills in particu-
lar, both introduced by Judge P. A. Orton of Darlington in the
assembly, one proposing a change in the rate of taxation of life
insurance companies, and the other increasing the rate of taxation
imposed upon the smaller railroads of the state, whose taxes pre-
viously had been merely nominal.

These bills, as was natural, roused antagonism on the part of
the interests affected. The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 133

Cojnpany, the one principally interested, sent a delegation to Mad-:
ison to oppose the measure. By the provisions of the bill the North-
western Mutual company was to be assessed at the rate of 1 per cent
on all its income, exclusive of rents from real estate and interest
on government bonds. It was estimated at the time that this change
in the law would increase the taxes of that company alone from
$40,000 to approximately $850,000. As a reason for considering
this tax excessive Judge H. L. Palmer, then president of the com-
pany, in a letter to the Milwaukee Journal April 7, 1899, said :

"A grievous injustice of the bill is that it imposes a tax here in
Wisconsin upon the same income upon which the company is required
to pay taxes in the states from which that income was derived. To
malse the point clear, the company was taxed in 1898 in thirty states
upon the premiums received in those states. Premiums constitute a large
part of the company's income. Although that part of the income con-
tributed by citizens of those thirty states has been there taxed, the bill
proposes to tax that same income over again in this state, and for the
benefit of this state, thus presenting a flagrant case of double taxation.
Is this just? Is this right toward the policy holders of the company?"

At the same time. Judge Palmer did not contend that no in-
crease in the rate of taxation should be made. He suggested that
his company would gladly meet the members of the tax commis-
sion for the purpose of endeavoring to find some common ground of
agreement for the settlement of the disputed question and offered
to afford the members of the commission every facility for the
examination of the books of the company in order that they might
arrive at an accurate understanding of its business.

This letter from Judg^ Palmer was the inspiration for a flood of
general comment on the part of the state press mostly favorable to
the position taken by the president of the largest corporation in the
state, the Northwestern Mutual. It was argued that the legisla-
ture should be fair — as fair as Judge Palmer professed himself to
be. The fact that this great corporation was willing to meet the
members of the legislature o.r the tax commissioners half way was
considered to be an evidence that a way of settling the vexing taxa-
tion problems had been found. The Milwaukee Journal, the paper
that had called out Judge Palmer's letter by its daily comments on
the taxation reform movement and its strenuous support of Gov.
Scofield's public and official utterances on the subject, was jubilant
at the prospect of immediate reform, or, to speak more accurately,
the prospect of material progress toward ultimate reform, but it
did not counsel radical action. In the introduction to Judge Palm-
er's letter it said, in part :

"Up to this time the press and public have paid little attention to
the details of the proposed legislation, but have been interested princi-
pally in winning what they believed was a fight to establish a principle
on which the question of tax reform hinged, largely. President Palmer's
letter admits the principle, and now will be discussed the details of the
bill to be enacted into law. The legislature has so far shown itself
to be conservative, and will doubtless listen to the Milwaukee company's

134 Political Rbfobm in Wisconsin.

complaint as to the injustice of the Orton bill. The people have been
fighting for just legislation, not radical legislation in this matter, at
the very beginning of the work."

As has previously been explained, the "people" had not been
fighting at all. Had they been fighting there would have been
some evidence of it in the previous campaign. As a matter of fact,
both parties had called for tax reform legislation in their platforms.

The Milwaukee Sentinel, at that time maintaining an under-
ground connection with Mr. La Follette and ministering to his
political comfort whenever possible, opposed the Orton insurance
tax bill. Like the journal, it believed an increase in the tax of the
Northwestern Mutual might well be demanded, but it was opposed
to so material an increase as was proposed by the Orton measure.
In several editorials printed early in April, 1899, it criticised the
bill severely as indicating a disposition on the part of its author to
burden the Northwestern Mutual with an excessive tax. Other
ne^vspapers throughout the state appeared to be less positive even
than The Sentinel and Journal. They were in favor of increased
corporation taxes, believing the first tax commission was correct
in its opinion that the public service corporations were not paying
at the same rate that other classes of property was taxed. But in
no case did they appear to have formed definite opinions as to the '
amount of taxes it would be fair to collect from the insurance com-
panies or any other corporations.

This tentative position of the public press is explained by the
fact that the editors did not have sufficient data upon which to
base an intelligent belief. In this connection, the address delivered
by Senator Whitehead in support of the tax commission bill when
it was presented to the senate by his committee is to the point.
It has not been the practice in this review to make long quotations
from public documents, but the address in question, delivered at a
time when the questions — ^numerous and involved — before the leg-
islature were being considered by men who were later criticised
because they had not already disposed of them, gives such a vivid
picture of the real situation that the temptation to reproduce it in
full is irresistible. The report of the speech is taken from the
Milwaukee Journal for April 15, 1899. Senator Whitehead said :

"When the governor's message came in at this session of the legis-
lature it contained a reference to the tax commission appointed under
the act of 1897, commending the work of the commission and calling
the attention of the legislature to the importance of making some pro-
vision for the continuation of the work of that commission.

"When the message was read the chairman of the judiciary commit-
tee introduced a resolution referring the portions of the governor's mes-
sage pertaining to matters of taxation to the standing committee on
assessment and collection of taxes. As the discussion on other important
tax bills proceeded before the committee, it became more and more
apparent to the minds of those who composed your standing committee
that the subject of taxation was one that required more than the opassiug
attention vvliich the legislature could give to it, and the recommendation

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 135

contained in the governor's message grew in importance in the minds
of tlie members of tlie committee. As soon as ttie bill could be prepared
it was introduced, carrying out the recommendation made by the gov-
ernor in his message for the appointment of a commission.

"There have been forty-two bills in the senate pertaining directly to
matters of taxation, which would occupy the attention and thought of
such a commission as this bill contemplates. There were introduced on
the other side of the hall seventy bills of this character ; bills referring
to the taxation of all kinds of property, and the taxation of all Itiuds of
corporations, and I might almost say, by all kinds of methods. Almost
the whole subject of taxation has been ope«ed up here in this session
of the legislation by this great number of bills which have been intro-
duced and which have passed or are now passing through the hands of
the committees.

. "Gentlemen, what is to be the result wlien this condition is so well
understood? Both of the political parties in their platforms make ref-
erence to this great subject. They fepeak sometimes in terms of re-
proach because taxes are so heavy ; they speak sometimes in terms of
condemnation because so much property and so many corporations and
individuals are escaping taxation altogether.

"There has been for the last forty years in the legislatures of the
different states an animated discussion going on, as there has been here,
with reference to the subject of taxation. Twenty-four different states
have had their commissions. But the trouble v/ith these tax commis-
sions has been, as it has with the tax commission we have had our-
I selves, that the result was merely literature, and I venture to say that
it lies unopened and unstudied on many of the desks of members of the
legislature. The recommendation of the governor to this legislature is
fo^ a tax commission that will do something, and that is the purpose
of the committee.

"We have the problems in our state as we find them discussed in the"
tax reports of Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey. The results
of tax commissions and tax investigations^ have been followed by the
establishment of permanent departments, and the results to the people
are satisfactory, because property is brought from its hiding places by
the millions and the burden of taxation begins to be distributed with
some sort of equality and with some sort of regard for the ability of
the taxpayer to pay the taxes.

"The bill provides, Mr. President, for the appointment of a com-
missioner, for an assistant commissioner, and still another assistant and
it provides for a term of office of ten years. And it provides salaries
commensurate with responsibility. We have seen in our committees
here this last winter men who stood before us as the representatives of
these great corporations, whose salaries were probably three times the
salary which this bill provides to be paid to the commissioner. We
desire a representative of the people when these great questions are
discussed before the committees of the legislature. We desire a m^n
who has made a study of the subject — not that he, might write a book,
but that he might come in and be the right hand of power of the legislature
when it takes hold of this great burden and attempts to lay it with some
sort of equal distribution upon the shoulders of those who are to carry it.
"These men who have appeared before us and discussed these bills
for the taxation of their corporations, are men of the highest standard
of ability and intelligence. They are masters of the subjects given to
their care. We of the legislature, coming from our homes and our places
of busihess, know nothing except that taxation is jumbled up, that it is
patchwork, and that the legislation has been guesswork, and that the
decisions of the courts lead us into confusion, not because the courts do
not know the law, but because act follows act in such rapid succession

136 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

that the law is continually unsettled. Mr. President, if we have a citizen
of this state intrusted with the responsibility, and to whom is given the
duty and the opportunity to take hold of this subject with the spirit and
power which its importance requires, then we shall see in future ses-
sions of the legislature a man on the floor before the committee repre-
senting the cause of this state who knows what he is talking about, and
who knows also what those who represent these other interests are
talking about.

"Mr. President, we are greatly concerned at this moment with the
great question of taxation Involving a great corporate interest in our
state, and we are anxious to do right. We are anxious to protect the
interests of the people and we are anxious that no wrong be done to the
great corporate interest. The discussion has gone on here for days in
the legislature before the committees and on the floor of the assembly,
and it is before us now, and for my part I don't know, and I doubt very
much whether my fellow senators know, what is right to be done in the
matter. And it seems to me, Mr. President, that the time has come for
the legislature of Wisconsin to heed the admonition of the governor.

"Mr. President, the subject is before us ; It is in the minds of the
legislatures of every state. I don't know where we shall find a solution
of it; it will only be found in the mind and in the study and in the
activity of some man. It will never come by chance. It will work out
in human experience. It will be worked out only by the patient effort
of men clothed with authority and responsibility and having in their
hands the honor and the glory of the state. Mr. President, we don't
wish Wisconsin to get the reputation of overtaxing its industries. On
the contrary, we desire that our state should invite industries because of
the justice of its tax laws. It is not a question of how much tax we can
wring from this corporation or that, or from this individual or the other.
It is a question of a just tax.

"I think I see, Mr. President, If this commission should be estab-
lished, a directing mind. I think I see these assessors, without experi-
ence and without knowledge of these confused laws which mix up the
lawyers, without knowledge of these decisions of the courts, I think I
see these men coming to the commission for a word of advice. I think
I see these commissioners going up and down the state, into different
counties, and studying, not a theory of taxation, but a condition of
taxation. I see these men who represent this great state in contact with
the citizens, and with those who are levying the taxes and who are
spending the money after the taxes have been collected. And when these
men come before the committee of the legislature with that kind of in-
formation, Mr. President, they come with the information which the
members of the legislature want ; the only information that will enable
them to frame laws that will meet the conditions which exist. We are
to be students of our own conditions as they are — of those laws which
stand upon our statute books.

"We have within our borders the finest opportunities for capital.
We have within our borders the finest opportunities for energy and in-
telligence. We have a population who have made out of this state a
state where one might be proud to dwell, and one whose citizenship one
might be proud to claim. And yet there is this continual complaint, not
alone in ours but in all the states, of the ill distribution and lack of dis-
tribution of the burden of taxation. The little state of Massachusetts
spends $30,000 a year on her tax, commissioner, and he. with his agents
and servants, goes into the factories and shops and studies the condi-
tions as he finds them there. He is able to determine from the rate that
men pay for wages, and the rate that they pay for material, and the
prices they get for their product, whether these corporations are invest-
ments that pay or whether their investments do not pay, and the taxes of

TAXA.XION ReFOBM IN WISCONSIN. 137

the state are adjusted in an equitable and able manner with the men
who have their capital invested and who are making the state. And my
mind reaches forward to time such conditions as that — my mind looks
forward, under the operation of a law like this, or a better one, when
the time shall come that the legislature shall frame a better one, to the
time when order shall come out of confusion, when there will be a
directing mind; when the resources of the state will be used, not to
impoverish the people by taxation, but to bring in wealth and capital
and industry and make our state glorious Indeed."

But the legislature did not postpone all action until a com-
mission could be appointed. The Orton insurance taxation bill
passed both houses with but few minor changes and was approved
by Gov. Scofield. At the session of the legislature held in 1901
it was found necessary to make certain changes in the law in or-
der to relieve the Northwestern Mutual from the effects of re-
taliatory legislation in other states, but the law is still on the sta-
tute books substantially in the form in which it originally passed,
and the tax now paid by the Wisconsin company amounts to more
than $30-0,000 annually.

The second Orton bill was designed to increase the license
fees paid by the smaller and less important railroads of the state.
An attempt was made to amend the bill by A. E. Hall, which
failed, and then Judge Orton himself proposed to amend the
measure by increasing the license fee to be paid by railroads of
the first class to 5 per cent of their gross receipts, which amend-
ment carried in the assembly. The bill was subsequently defeat- -
ed in the senate, of which more will be said under the proper
heading.

The recommendation of the tax commission that a tax on
inheritance be levied by law was adopted, and chapter 355, laws
of 1899, "An act for a tax on gifts, inheritances, bequests and
legacies in certain cases," was passed. This law was later de-
clared unconstitutional by the Supreme court and all taxes col-
lected under it were returned.

138 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

CHAPTER VIII.

A. E. Hall and Railkoad Taxation.

While Assemblyman A. E. Hall, of Dunn county was not the
first to propose an increase in the amount of taxes collected from
the railway companies, there can be no questioning the truth of
the statement that he was the most persistent and uncompromis-
ing advocate of that proposition in the state during the years im-
mediately preceding the adoption of the ad valorem system of
taxation by the legislature in 1903. It is true that Mr. Hall did
not himself advocate the ad valorem system, but he did, in ad-
dresses delivered in the assembly and in communications to the
press, present an estimate of the actual value of railroad proper-
ties as a basis or justification of his proposed increase in the
percentage to be paid as -a license fee, as follows :

1. Six per cent of the gross earnings of all roads whose
gross earnings exceed $5,000 a mile yearly.

2. Five and a half per cent of the gross earnings of all roads
whose gross earnings exceed $4,500 a mile.

3. Five per cent of the gross earnings of all roads whose
earnings equal or exceed $4,000 a mile.

4. Four and a half per cent of the gross earnings of all other
roads.

Mr. Hall began his campaign for increased rates of railroad
taxation early in his legislative career, but he was handicappedr
It was his misfortune to cause the impression to be spread abroad
that he was an enemy of the transportation companies and that
it was his purpose to harass the objects of his displeasure in every
possible way. He began his campaign for investigation when he
first went to Madison in 1891 as the member from Dunn county.
Having served a number of years in the Minnesota legislature
and three terms as speaker of the Minnesota assembly, he was not
obliged to wait until he had "learned the ropes" before taking up
his self appointed task. It is not necessary to go into the full de-
tails as to the war waged by Mr. Hall on the railroads, and it is
merely mentioned here as an explanation of the reputation as a
railroad baiter which attached to him at the beginning of his
legislative career in Wisconsin and stuck to him until the end.

An event which probably added weight to the belief that Mr.
Hall was merely "making trouble" for the transportation com-
panies was the outcome of an investigation caused by his. own mo-
tion in 1893. He introduced a resolution in the assembly (re-
solution No. 30A), in which it was explained that the reports
made of gross earnings by the two principal railroads doing busi-
ness in Wisconsin were manifestly incorrect and that the state
was thus being defrauded of large sums annually in license fees.

Taxation Refobm tw Wisconsin. 189

His belief was based on the alleged fact that the reports of earn-
ings to the officers of this state did not agree with certain reports
made to other states.

A committee was appointed and an investigation made. Mr.
Hall being chairman of the committee. Two reports were made
to the legislature, one signed by E. A. Edmonds and the other
by Mr. Hall. Mr. Edmonds reported that he and the third mem-
ber of the committee, whose name is not given, called at the offices
of the railroad companies under investigation and examined their
books. The report covers five pages of the assembly journal and
professes to give a complete explanation of the discrepancy dis-
covered by Mr. Hall, which was caused by the fact that certain
states to which reports were made were not taxing railroads on
the basis of earnings and the reports were therefore merely form-
al, approximate statements. The majority report concludes with
these words:

"From the examination made by your committee, and from all the
information which they have received, they are satisfied that correct and
honest reports have been made by the various railroad companies operat-
ing lines within this state, to the state, of the actual earnings of each
of said roads."

Mr. Hall handed in a minority report. He did not claim to
have made an examination of the books of the companies. He
merely compiled a. number of statistical tables, gathering his fig-
ures from different sources, in an attempt to proye what could
only be proved from the books of the companies indicted by him
on a charge of fraud. It is not surprising that the legislature
did not take his report seriously; it is not surprising that Mr.
Hall's so-called anti-railroad crusade was not materially advanced
by this failure to "make good" when the opportunity was given
him. When he came back in 1895, 1897, and 1899, still insist-
ing that the roads were defrauding the state by false reports, or
that the license fee exacted of them should be increased, there
was a manifest disposition to treat his figures and elaborately pre-
pared statistics with a skepticism that had its origin in the in-
; vestigation of L893.

But the failure to take seriously the statistics and computa-
tions of Mr. Hall did not mean that the people of the state, or any
considerable number of them, were entirely satisfied with the'
method of collecting taxes from the transportation companies
or the amount of such taxes paid into the state treasury. There
always had been opposition to the license fee system of taxing
railroads! As has been said. State Senators P. W. von Cotzhausen
and J. V. Quarles, the former in 1873-'74 and the latter in 1881,
had proposed a return to the ad valorem system of taxing that
class of corporation. Both of these members of the legislature had
urged strong reasons for the proposed change and Senator von
Cotzhausen in particular had urged that notwithstanding the

]40 Political Refoem in Wisconsin.

famous decision of the Supreme court in 1863, when two of the
members of the court wrote opinions that the license fee system
was in violation of the uniformity clause of the constitution, but
declined to disturb a former decision of the same court because a
reversal would bring disaster upon the business interests of the
state — the time had come to return to the constitutional rule of
uniformity and an ad valorem assessment of railroad property.

But the license fee system had been adopted in the first place
because it was simple and easy of application. The old method
of permitting local assessing officers to put a valuation on railroad
property in their districts had proved to be impossible of success-
ful operation even when there were but a few miles of railroad in
the state. It was hoped when the license fee plan was adopted
that a solution of the problem had been reached, although the
amount collected by the state was but 1 per cent on the gross earn-
ings of the' companies. This fee was increased, however, to 3 per
cent in 1862, 4 per cent in 1874, and in 1876 the roads were
classified, the smaller roads being taxed a smaller per 'cent, the
amount being determined by their earnings per mile.

Other states had experimented with railroad taxation plans
of almost every conceivable character, yet none of them had suc-
ceeded in finding a plan that was entirely satisfactory. Tax
commissions had investigated the subject and reported; econom-
ists had published opinions at considerable length which con-
tained no satisfactory conclusion; pamphlets were written and
printed, newspaper discussion in nearly all of the states had at-
tempted to throw light on the subject, and yet the question wag,
not settled. In 1888 Prof. Eichard T. Ely, then a member of the
Johns Hopkins imiversity faculty, now with the University of
Wisconsin, published the results of an investigation made by him-
self of this subject in which he expressed the opinion that the Wis-
consin plan was the best that had so far been devised to dispose
of the question of railroad taxation. He gave as his reasons for
expressing this belief that the plan was simple, inexpensive in
operation, and that the amount raised by this method was so im-
portant an item in the income of the state that it had not been
found necessary to levy a state tax for general purposes for a num-
ber of years.

No confidence is violated when it is said that the railroad com-
panies themselves were not entirely free from concern on this
subject. It was the business of the officers of those companies to
look after the interests of their stockholders and the frequent ex-
pressions of opinion on the part of public men and writters that
the transportation companies were not paying their Just propor-
tion of the tax burdens, coupled with the repeated atteriipts to
raise the license fee, led those officers to believe that, after all, the
license fee might not be the best method of taxing their proper-

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 141

ty, notwithstanding its simplicity and the ease with which they
could comply with it. No one could tell where the legislature
would stop once it broke the ice and began to raise the percentage
paid by the railroads on their gross earnings in lieu of taxes.

This was the situation when the first tax commission report-
ed to the legislature of 1899 that their investigations had led
them "to the conclusion that all corporations which are taxed on
the basis of earnings or on a mileage basis pay relatively less
taxes than other persons and less than they would pay on the
basis of value."

142 Political Refohm in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE IX.
Gov.'Scofield's "Warning.

Gov. Scofield, under whose administration the work of fram-
ing new laws began, naturally took a lively interest in the de-
tails of that work. As has been shown from the records, he was
intensely interested in the enactment of statutes providing for
the taxation of car companies and freight line companies. His
communications to the press on the subject of public revenues and
expenditures created an interest that had not been felt before on
the part of taxpayers. His frequently published interviews kept
that interest alive. His address at the Janesville farmers' institute
in 1898, reported in full in The Sentinel of March 10, in which
reference is made to Gen. Benjamin Harrison's address delivered in
Chicago on Washington's birthday the preceding month, contrib-
uted to spread abroad a knowledge of the facts with respect to the
state's financial condition.

But Gov. Scofield saw a danger in this movement that no one
but him at that time appeared to apprehend. In his Janesville
address he spoke at length on the "inequalities" in taxation that
resulted from our loose and illogical system of assessments.
He explained how large amounts of intangible personal property
escaped taxation altogether, and how the burden of defraying the
expenses of government, local and state had in the past fallen
upon property that easily could be reached. That this was an in-
justice to certain classes of taxpayers he did not believe any rea-
sonable man would attempt to deny; that the work should be car-
ried forward with vigor he believed was necessary. To this end he
had favored the creating of a tax commission, and he hoped the
next legislature would so act that the work of that body, or a
similiar one, could be still further advanced.

In 1900, however, after the permanent tax commission had'
been created and provision had been made for paying its expenses.
Gov. Scofield, who had kept his eyes' keenly upon the move-
ment, detected what he believed to be a danger. This belief is
best expressed in his own words, taken from a Sentinel report
of an address delivered by the governor at Delevan before a far-
mers' institute on March 14, 1900. Here is what he said.

"Upon this subject of taxation I desire to say a word at this time.
It Is one that has deeply interested me ever since I became a public
oflBcial, and one toward which no Intelligent man may be indifferent
I see in the general agitation upon this subject this danger : That the
tendency of legislation and of public sentiment seems to be to increase
the public revenues. I desire to say to you now that when there is col-
lected from the public one dollar more than is necessary to carry on the
legitimate functions of government, there is danger of extravagance, and,
ultimately, worse than extravagance. Fortunately we have not had this

Taxation Refobm in Wisconsin. 143

condition to meet. I speak of it because there is shown a disposition in
various ways to largely increase the income of the state.

"In a state as prosperous as ours taxes are not really burdensome
when we compare our conditions with those of many other states. The
ill feeling concerning taxes grows out of the belief that there is a
marked inequality in distributing the burdens. There is a general im-
pression that certain properties are not paying their just share of taxa-
tion. The legislature recognized this sentiment when it created a tax
commission to look into the matter and present to it the facts bearing
on the situation. That commission is now at work and when it presents
its report and recommendations, I am satisfied that it will be made clear
whether any property or properties are being overburdened, and whether
others are shirking their proper duties and responsibilities. If the latter
proves to he the case and laws he enacted to remedy the evil, it should
not result merely in additional demand heing made upon the properties
that have failed to pay their share; hut an eguilihrium should he estab-
lished hy reducing proportionately the amount noio paid hy those that
are overburdened."

This is the only instance found where public expression was
given to the possibility of unnecessarily increasing the revenues of
the state. There had always been a tacit understanding that
should increased revenues result from the assessment of proper-
ty that previously had escaped taxation and from increased taxes
to be collected from corporations, the classes of property -that had
been paying more than their just share would be benefited there-
by. In other words, an increase in one place would be offset by a
corresponding reduction in another. That is what taxation re-
form was supposed to mean, if it meant anything.

It was understood, of course, that the necessary expenses of
the state were increasing from year to year. The charitable and
penal institutions were calling for additional funds each year.
Eecently the home for feeble minded had been built at Chippewa
Falls and the reformatory prison at Green Bay was then under
construction. The state imiversity was enlarging the scope of
its operations and new buildings .and grounds were to be ac-
quired. All these expenses must be provided for and it was rea-
sonable to suppose the state would be called upon to increase its
revenues in order to meet the demands upon the treasury.

In 1889 the total disbursements of the state amounted to
$2,5n„227.76 ; in 1899 they had grown to $3,884,339.46, an in-
crease of $1,310,111.70. During the same years the license fees col-
lected from all companies that paid a percentage of their gross earn-
ings in lieu of taxes increased from $1,060,560.Q5 to $1,711,387.60,
a gain of $650,837.55. But the addition to the license fees
collected was only about one-half of the increase in the state's dis-
bursements.

As it was only to these companies that the state could look
for additional revenue except by direct taxation, and as it was
for an increase in the license fees collected from corporations that
the men at the head of the taxation reform movement were con-
tending—at least they demanded an investigation as to the suf-

144f Political Reform in Wisconsin.

fieiency of the contributions from these corporations to the state's
income — there was^ in the governor's opinion, a probability that
the fees collected from this source might outrun the legitimate
expenses of the government. In an elaborate /argument inade in
the assembly when the proposed increase in the railroad license
fees was under consideration, Mr. Hall had given his estimate
of a fair valuation and tax on those corporations. He had shown
how, in his opinion, if the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul and
Chicago and North- Western railroads alone paid their fair share
of the expenses of the state in 1898, they would have paid $617,-
477.57 more than they actually did pay. As the annual increase
in expenses during the ten preceding years had averaged but $113,-
435.47, and as steps already had been taken to increase the taxes
of all classes of public service corporations with the exception of
railroads, it did not require that a man be endowed with the
gift of prophecy to clearly see that the average increase in the
revenues would outrun the average increase in the expenses if
the affairs of the state were to be administered in the future as in
the past.

As a matter of fact, the increase in corporation taxes has been
so material that there is now collected from that source alone
more than the entire disbursements of the state amounted to in
1898. In the latter year, according to statements printed in the
report of the tax commission for 1907, the total disbursements
for all purposes, inclusive of the trust fund incomes and funds
raised by the tax for the educational institutions, amounted to
> $3,708,582.50, while the corporation taxes in 1908 amounted to
$3,992,530.07, as follows :

License fees and taxes:

Railroad companies 53,265,676.73

Street railway and electric light companies 22,207.31

Express companies 9,344.39

Sleeping car companies 5,343.28

Freight line and equipment companies 3,315.54

Telegraph companies 45,207.45

Telephone companies 36,628.89

Fire insurance companies 174,225.52

Life insurance companies 392,843.14

Accident, surety, etc., companies 27,396.20

Boom and improvement companies '. 252.85

Plank road companies 173.39

Loan and trust companies 9,915.38

Total $3,992,530.07

It was in view of this probable increase now actual, that Gov.
Scofield in 1900, warned the people of the state that provision
should be made to lighten the burden of taxation on all overtaxed
property whenever it was found that the tax on another class of
property Justly could be advanced.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 145

In order to provide a way to handle the appropriations of
public money intelligently Gov. Seofield, in 1899, proposed that
the legislature provide for the regular filing, at the opening of
each legislative session, of a budget explaining the needs of the sev-
eral departments of the state government for the coming bien-
nial term. He prepared and presented such a budget and it
proved of material value to the members of the legislature, par-
ticularly the committee on claims. No budget has since been pre-
sented to a legislature. That was one of the practical reforms
that was ignored during the violent outbreak of theoretical reform
that followed. It was too practical and businesslike in character
to appeal to Gov. Scofield's successor.

It was to further perfect the business system of the state that
Gov. Scofield, at the same term of the legislature, in the same
message, asked for authority to provide for the state a central sys-
tem of accounting to the end that the financial condition of the
state might be at all times clear and understandable, and that the
funds of the state might be fully safeguarded. The legislature
granted the request; experts were employed who worked months
upon the books and finally perfected a central system of book-
keeping and proper checks by which the state's money, a large
part of which is collected from many sources and passed through
the hands of hundreds of men, could be traced.

This system of accounting was examined by a committee of
the legislature and approved. A law was enacted ordering it put
into effect by the governor. Unfortunately the executive was giv-
en some little discretion in the matter and Gov. La Follette de-
cided that it was "not necessary" to put the entire system in force.
This was another reform that failed at the beginning of a reform
period.

146 Political Reform ifi Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE X.

The Tax Commission's Eeport in 1901.

The subject of taxation came before the legislative session of
1901 in the form of a report from the tax commission, supple-
mented by a section of Gov. La Follette's message. For weeks
there had been iq circulation a rumor, based on little tangible
evidence it is true, that the new executive "had it in for" the
tax commission and that his message would prove to be a "bomb"
for that body.

The tax commission, originally composed of Gen. Michael
Grifiin of Eau Claire, Ju.dge Norman S. Gilson of Fond du Lac,
and George Curtis, Jr., of Merrill, had been changed' by the death
of Gen. Griffin before the end of the first year of its work and just
as the commissioners were getting their material in shape for
study. Judge Gilson succeeded Gen. Griffin as the head of the
commission and the vacancy was filled by Gov. Scofield's appoint-
ment of William A. Anderson to a place on the commission. Mr.
Anderson's term expired during the winter of 1901 and he was
supplanted by Nils P. Haugen.

But one of these gentlemen had served on the original tax com-
mission, George Curtis, Jr. Gen. Griffin and Judge Gilson were
men of eminence in their profession and had served the state ably
in public office, the former as a member of the state legislature
and representative in congress, the latter on the Circuit bench.
Mr. Anderson had been engaged in newspaper work until appoint-
ed private secretary to Gov. Scofield in 1897. Mr. Curtis was a
lawyer who had enjoyed exceptional opportunities of becoming
acquainted with the tax laws by residing and practicing law in
a territory that was fruitful of tax litigation.

The first year of the tax commission's experience was spent
almost entirely in study. The questions confronting them were
many and the problem as a whole was a big and complicated one.
In so far as it was able, the first tax commission had made an ex-
cellent start and furnished considerable valuable data, but the
new commission found it necessary to go deeper and discover, if
possible, what other states had accomplished results in the way
of taxation reform and how far the experiences in other states
would be of value to Wisconsin.

The first year's preliminary work had only been completed
and the work of classifying the information secured and digesting
the facts begun when it became necessary to prepare a report for
the opening of the coming session of the legislature, as required
by the law creating the commission. It was explained in the let-
ter of transmittal that the report was incomplete. The com-
missioners said:

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 147

"We regret that this part of the work may appear somewhat frag-
mentary, unaccompanied by the data upon which the discussions and
conclusions are based, but this will be remedied by the publication later
of the complete report comprising the detail of all the worlj done since
the organization of the commission."

' The report contained an account of hearings held before the
commission in which the question of taxing corporations was
gone into at considerable length. An effort had been made to se-
cure a reasonably accurate valuation of all the "taxable property
of the state, personal and real, as well as to put a value on the prop-
erty of the railroads and other public service corporations. Not-
withstanding the apology of the commission for the incompleteness
of its published report, the document was a valuable one and was of
great use to the legislature. It would have been of greater service
had it not been for political developments during the winter.

In conclusion the tax commission made certain recommenda-
tions. It was not prepared to suggest that the license fee system
of taxing railroads be abandoned but it had gone deep enough
into the subject to feel justified in confirming the statement made
by the first commission to the effect that the railroad corporations
were not bearing their full share of the public burdens. In this con-
nection they recommended :

"That the license fee system of collecting taxes from certain cor-
porations be maintained, at least until it be given a test under conditions
that will make the returns received from it more nearly equal to what
would be collected from the same properties on an ad valorem basis.

"That the annual license fee to be paid by the railroads in lieu of all
other taxes shall be a percentage of the annual gross earnings graded
from a minimum of 3 per cent to a maximum of 5^^ per cent — the grad-
uation and classification to be as follows :

"Three per cent of the gross earnings of all railroads whose gross
earnings do not exceed $2,000 per mile; the rate thereafter to be in-
creased from the minimum of S^per cent by adding thereto .1 percent for
each $100 of gross earnings per mile until the gross earnings per mile
shall equal $4,500 and the maximum rate of 5% per cent is reached; and
5% per cent of the gross earnings of all the railroads whose gross earn-
ings per mile are $4,500 and over. . The railroads whose gross earnings
are equal to $3,000 per mile will pay 4 per cent, $4,000 per mile, 5 per
cent, $4,500 per mile or over, 5% per cent.

"The railroads in 1900 on the earnings of 1899 paid the sum of
$1,546,720.68, on gross earnings of $39,487,403.67. The above; classifica-
tion on the per cent of the gross earnings if applied to the gross earnings
in 1899 will give a revenue approximately $2,150,000."

The commission also made recommendations concerning other
public service corporations and it proposed that the evil of un-,
dervaluation be abolished by requiring that all property be assessed
at its actual market" value. A number of tables were printed
in the report illustrating how widely the assessed valuation of pro-
perty varied from the actual value, as well as showing the total
estimated value of real and personal property and the estimated
value of all the railroads doing business in this state.

14,8 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE XI.
Gov. La Follette Enters.

At this point Gov. Eobert M. La Follette enters upon the stage
and takes a position of advantage in the center, with the spot light
shining upon him. As had been intimated before, up to this time
he had made no record as a taxation reformer. There is not one
line in any of his published addresses that would quicken the spirit
or enlighten the mind of any student of the subject. So far as
taxation was concerned, there was neither inspiration nor informa-
tion to be found in the La Follette literature.

The governor's message was a long one. Possibly that fact
might be left to be understood, as all of Gov. La FoUette's mes-
sages and public documents are, or were, long. It was — also like
all of his messages and public documents — carefully prepared and
full of interest. His bitterest enemy will never accuse him of being
dull. A large part of the message was devoted to the subject of
taxation and fully one-half of that large part was devoted to sug-
gestions of changes in the law creating the tax commission.

In the first place, the governor gave his approval to the general
plan of preparing for a revision of the system by a thorough inves-
tigation of the subject by a commission. He regretted the death of
Gen. Griffin as an event that had tended to delay the work of the
commission, and he also regretted that the commission would not
be able to propose a "complete plan of revision of the tax laws."
But he was confident the members of that body would be able
to render important services to the legislature in their efforts to
enact such laws as were immediately necessary in order to correct
evils in some directions. He did not counsel haste. It was impor-
tant that time be taken to go into the subject thoroughly. He was
of the opinion that it might require another biennial period in
order to complete in a satisfactory manner recommendations for a
revision of the tax laws.

It was Gov. La Follette's desire, however, that no time be lost in
shiftiag the burden of unjust taxation from the shoulders of those
who had borne it too long by placing that burden where it right-
fully belonged — upon those who previously had escaped taxation in
whole or in part. He said :

"But, though it may require another biennial period to perfect and
complete this work of the commission, the fact should, under no circum-
stances, be made the excuse or justification for delaying such corrections
of manifest Inequalities as it is possible for the present legislature to
effect. Indeed, the great task of the commission in constructing a com-
plete system may be aided by remedying every defect possible in the
existing law, either by amendment or independent act at thir session,
thus advancing along the line of Revision and testing results wherever
possible. In the meantime, the excess of burden which has so long rested
upon certain classes of our citizens would be transferred to those who

Taxation Refobm in Wisconsin. 149

have carried less than a proportionate share in the past. Every act of
government should be fair and just, and no portion of the system which
allows certain classes of property to escape taxation, wholly or in part,
should be permitted to stand upon the statutes."

Later in the message it became apparent that the governor was
aiming at owners of personal property, mortgages, stocks, bonds,
and moneys, when he referred to classes of property, that, wholly
or in part, escaped taxation, for he says :

"That the law with respect to the assessment of all property can be
so amended, supervised and enforced as to secure uniformity of assess-
ment and enormously increase the tax upon property which now escapes
wholly or in part, there is not the slightest reason to doubt. With neigh-
boring states adding $200,000,000 or $300,000,000 to the assessed valua-
tion of personal property in a short twelve months, we shall be derelict
in our duty indeed, if we fail to strengthen the law wherever it is weak,
and provide for its vigorous enforcement."

One more quotation is necessary in order that Gov. ,La FoUette's
position on this question may be understood. This was in effect his
first definite statement of principles so far as relates to the taxa-
tion question. He was, as required by the constitution, laying be-
fore the legislature facts iri his possession relating to the matter
under consideration and giving formal and official utterances to his
opinions, deliberately formed and clearly expressed.

As a basis upon which to rely in forming his opinions, Mr. La
Follette had requested the commissioner of labor and industrial
statistics to prepare tables showing the total value of all property
in the state and the estimate of the percentage of property in each
class that escaped assessment and taxation. It may be said here
that the tax commission had prepared similar tables and that they
did not agree with those found in the governor's message, but the
difference was not so radical as to create controversy or justify ex-
tended arguments. The main point on which both authorities
agreed was that the percentage of real property assessed was high,
that railroad property came next in the scale, and personal property
cut a sorry figure in the. percentage column. With respect to the
taxation of corporations, after commenting briefly on the figures.
Gov. La Follette said :

"One of the questions you will have to determine in dealing with this
subject is whether railway companies shall be taxed directly. By assess-
ment upon the value of their property, or whether they shall continue to
pay under the license system a certain percentage upon their gross earn-
ings. The strong objection to a license fee upon gross earnings is that
it allows the corporation to make its own report of the amount of its
gross earnings, or, in other words, to assess itself. It is hut just to note
in this connection that, as appears hy the ahove tables, the railway
companies have been fairer than the average of individuals, who, as to
the great mass of personal property, assess themselves; the percentage
of assessed to market value of the railways being 20 5-100 as against
12 9-100 for all other personal property in 1899. In no case, however,
should the assessment be left to the taxpayer, whether corporation or in-
dividual, without some check or safeguard for the state. If the railway

150 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

companies are to be taxed directly by assessment upon tlie value of their
property, then I have no hesitation in saying that the assessment should
be made by a state board of the highest possible character and ability.
If the present system of a license fee,- fixed at a certain rate per cent
upon the gross earnings, is to be continued, then I recommend that there
be reposed in some representative of the state, either the tax commission
or board of assessment, authority to increase the amount of gross earn-
ings reported by any railway company to such sum as will, in the judg-
ment of the commission or board of assessment, render the amount just
and equitable as representing the actual gross earnings of the com-
pany reporting the same ; that such be taken as prima facie evidence of
the actual gross earnings of such railroad company ; but that any
railway company considering itself aggrieved by the sum so fixed as
gross earnings may appear before such commission or board of assess-
ment and be fully heard and produce witnesses and evidence In their
behalf in respect thereto. The final determination of the commission or
board should in some form be subject to the supervision of the courts."

This is a fair outline of the opinions and recommendations of
Gov. La Eollette in his first message to the legislature, so far as tax
legislation is concerned. There were some suggestions as to changes
in the law creating the tax commission, some of which were wise and
some foolish, like the twelve virgins. For instance, he proposed to
give the commission power to supervise assessments and enforce the
assessment laws ; to limit the amount of expenditures that could be
incurred by the commission ; to require the commission to report di-
rectly to the executive instead of to the legislature. These were all
wise suggestions and they were heeded by the legislature. On the
other hand, he proposed to take from the commission the power and
opportunity to make investigations requiring statistical work and to
transfer all such work to the bureau of statistics, another department
of the state government. He also expressed the belief that the com-
mission could complete its investigations in two years and that it
should be prepared at the end of the next biennial period to report a
complete system of tax laws that would wotk satisfactorily. Com-
ments on these suggestions were superfluous.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 161-

CHAPTEE XII.

Attempts at Legislation.

As has been explained in a former chapter on primary elections,
there was a profound peace in Wisconsin political circles at the time
the legislature convened in 1901. There also was every reason to
believe substantial progress would be made in taxation legislation
along lines suggested by the tax commission. That body had recom-
mended "that the license fee system of collecting taxes from certain
corporations be maintained, at least until it be given a test under
conditions that will make the returns received from it more equal to
what, would be collected from the same properties on an ad valorem
basis," and, as has been shown, it presented a plan of license fee
taxation that would increase the amount collected from all classes of
railroads.

Gov. La Follette had shown by his tables that the railroad com-
panies were not paying taxes at the same rate as real property, but
he laid great stress upon the fact that it was personal property that'
was escaping its just share of taxation.

The result of conferences between the tax commission and lead-
ers in the legislature was that two bills were prepared by the com-
mission, one increasing the rate of taxation un'der the license fee
system as recommended by the commission in its report ; the other
providing for an ad valorem assessment of all railroad property for
the purposes of taxation. These bills were introduced in both houses
by the respective committees on assessment and collection of taxes,
made up of the following members :

Senators Whitehead (chairman), Eiordan, Wolff, Green, and
Mills.

Assemblymen Hall, Stevens, Frost, Zinn, Brunson, Lane, and
McCabe.

These bills were introduced in the two houses on the same day,
Jan. 30, and were numbered 94 and 95 on the senate files, and 164
and 165 on the assembly files. They were referred to the committee
on assessment and collection of taxes in each house.

There were also introduced and referred to the committee on
assessment and collection of taxes, the bills being introduced by that
committee, the following senate bills :

No. 215, a bill for the taxation of sleeping ear companies and to
repeal chapter 113 of the laws of 1899.

No. 216, a bill for the taxation of the property of express com-
panies in the state and to repeal chapter 111 of the laws of 1899.

No. 217, a bill to provide for the taxation of equipment com-
panies and to repeal chapter 114 of the laws of 1899.

No. 218, a bill to provide for the taxation of the property of
freight line companies"' and to repeal chapter 113 of the laws of 1899.

No. 219, a bill providing for the taxation of the property of tele-

152 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

grapk companies and to repeal sections 1216, 1217, 1218, and subdi-
vision 15 of section 1038 of the statutes of 1898.

No. 334, a bill relating to license fees, for telephone companies
and to repeal section 1223 of the statutes of 1898.

No. 235, a bill providing for license fees to be paid by street rail-
way companies and to repeal sections 1232, 1223d, 1332e and 1232f
of the statutes of 1898 and chapter 354 of the laws of 1899.

All of these bills, it should be remembered, were introduced in
the senate by the committee on assessment and collection of taxes
and that committee thereby became sponsors for the measures. Five
of the bills were drawn to comply with the recommendations of the
tax commission and the others were in harmony with the general
plan proposed by that body. The bills were, in fact, drawn by the
tax commissioners themselves in consultation with the members of
the committee. Senators Whitehead, Eiordan, Wolf, Green, and
Mills.

In addition to the two railway taxation bills there also were
introduced in the assembly by the committee, duplicates of four
of the senate bills, those providing for the taxation of telegraph,
freight line, equipment, and street railway companies.

Another important measure, introduced by Assemblyman Frost
of Portage county, was No. 284A, "A bill to amend chapter 48 of
the Wisconsin statutes of 1898, relating to the taxation of mort-
gaged real estate." The controversy that grew out of the govern-
or's veto of this bill later was a spirited one, as the measure was
popular in both houses. The principle involved in the measure was
undoubtedly correct, a fact that since has been demonstrated, but
Gov. La FoUette objected to both the principle and the form. One
defect pointed out in the veto message was a serious one, and it is
doubtful if the courts would have upheld the law had the governor
spared it when it came before him. But this is not the place to
consider the merits of the controversy over the Frost mortgage
taxation bill, as it came to be called.

Naturally, the companies that would be affected by the passage
of these bills gathered in Madison to oppose them. There never
was a time or a place when taxpayers did not object to any plan
that had for its object an increase in their taxes. There have been
isolated cases of individuals voluntarily increasing their assessment,
but the rule is that taxpayers prefer to see "the other fellows' "
taxes raised.

When hearings were held before the joint committee on assess-
ment and collection of taxes the interested corporations appeared
by attorney or representatives of some kind and entered their ob-
jections. The most conspicuous of these representatives, as a mat-
ter of course, were those who were there to protect the interests of
the railroad companies. Not only the regular legislative repre-
sentatives of the roads appeared before the committee, but the at-
torneys from the legal department of each road considered the sub-

Taxation Eefoem in Wisconsin. 153

ject of enough importance to call for their personal attendance for
the purpose of making arguments.

The most strenuous opposition on the part of the railroads was
brought out to defeat the bill providing for an increase in the per-
centage rate then being paid, which would have raised the rate on
the gross income of the first class roads from 4 to 5.5 per cent. It
should be remembered that 1901 was a boom year, following on the
heels of three previous boom years and likely to be followed by
others of a similar character. The transportation lines were doing
a large business, the capacity of their equipment being taxed to
care for the products of the farms, mines and factories of the
country. There had been an increase in the license fees paid to the
state in 1899 over those of 1898 of $112,763.11; in 1900 over 1899,
$187,031.50; in 1901 over 1900, $53,238.15.

There was reason to believe this increase would continue from
year to year because of the development of the country's resources
and the additional tonnage the transportation lines would be called
upon to handle. It was even believed by the officers of the'com-
panies that, at a 4 per cent rate on their gross earnings, they would
soon be paying more taxes than any ot]jer class of property. This
being their understanding of the situation it is not surprising that
they made a strenuous fight against the proposition to raise the
rate to 5.5 per cent, an increase of 37.5 per cent over the rate pre-
viously paid.

, Furthermore, the railroad representatives argued that, by the
showing made by the tax commission, they were then paying a much
higher rate of taxes than the owners of personal property, which'
class of property was escaping taxation annually to the value of
hundreds of millions of dollars. As confirmation of their position
on this point the railroad representatives quoted from Gov. La Fol-
lette's message, printing in their briefs the table found in that im-
portant state paper and copying in large type the governor's state-
ment : "It is but just to note, in this connection, that, as appears by
the above tables, the railway companies have been fairer than the
average individuals, who, as to the great mass of personal property,
assess themselves; the percentage of assessed to market value of
the railways being 20 5-100 as against 12 9-100 for all other personal
property in 1899."

The hearings before the committees were numerous and the
controversy was warmly fought out, the contending parties being
the tax commission on the one side and the corporations on the
other. That the members of the two committees were inclined to
favor the bills goes without saying. Had they not been in favor
of legislation of this character they would not have been instru-
mental in preparing the bills, or having them prepared, and intro-
ducing them in the two houses of the legislature.

During all this time Gov. E. M. La Follette held his peace with
respect to the two pending railway taxation bills. No record was

154 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

made of his conferences with his friends and lieutenants and it is
impossible, therefore, to furnish documentary evidence of his po-
sition on the subject during the weeks of contest before the com-
mittees. It was publicly known that the railway representatives
were using the governor's message to the discredit of the bills, but
no protest ever came from the executive chamber against such prac-
tices ; no apology for or explanation of the quoted passages was ever
vouchsafed the committee or the public ; no aid or counsel was ever
given to the members of the committee or the tax commission in
their efforts to solve this, perplexing problem, although a personal
invitation to take part in the consideration of the measures was
conveyed to the governor by the chairman of the senate committee.
Senator Whitehead. So far as taxation legislation was concerned, a
deep and impenetrable silence brooded over the executive chamber.

Meanwhile the tension caused by the campaign, for and against
the primary election bill was becoming painful. The harmony that
prevailed at the opening of the session was strained almost to a
breaking point, the overshadowing importance of that administra-
tive measure casting all other legislative problems into the shade.
Where there had been, in the beginning, great interest manifested
in the work of the committee on assessment and collection of taxes,
there now developed a subject of public interest of, apparently, para-
mount importance — the primary election bill. This bill was made
the test of allegiance to the administration. The signals, passwords,
grips, hailing and distress signs of the new secret political society
all had reference to the primary election bill and no other. The
forces of the administration were lined up and drilled with the sole
view of securing the passage of that bill.

This may explain the failure of Gov. La Follette to come to the
support of the members of the committees and the tax commission
in their fight for increased corporation taxation. In the absence of
a better explanation it is fair to assume that the executive was
staking all on the primary election bill and permitting other im-
portant nieasures to take care of themselves; that he was willing
to have his own message used to defeat taxation bills provided he
could secure the passage of his pet measure.

At all events, the assembly committee came in on April 17 with
a dividend report on bill No. 165A, the one providing for an in-
crease in the rate of taxation on railroad gross earnings. Messrs.
Zinn, -Brunson, Lane and McCabe recommended the bill for indefi-
nite postponement, while Messrs. Hall, Stevens and Frost dissented
from the majority report. This was the measure most strenuously
fought by the railway companies. The majority of the committee
did not see fit to make an extended report, but the minority ex-
plained in detail their reasons for supporting the measure and ask-
ing that it be passed. The reasons given were identical with those
found in the report of the tax commission.

On April 33 the bill came up again and was indefinitely post-

TAXA.TION liBrOBM IN WISCONSIN. 165

poned by the assembly on recommendation by the committee major-
ity. The assembly was understood to be controlled by the gov-
ernor. Whenever a test vote was taken on a measure in which he
was interested, his wishes uniformly ruled in that house. His
newspapers and literary bureau asserted later that the senate was
"organized against the governor," but no one ever disputed the
truth of the statement that the assembly was organized in his in-
terests. There are strong grounds for the belief that, had Gov. La
Follette exerted himself to secure the passage of taxation bills,
practically all of the measures proposed by the commission would
have been enacted into law. All the evidence goes to prove that he
occupied neutral grounds on this subject and permitted his message
to be used to the disadvantage of the taxation bills.

The vote on the indefinite postponement of bill No. 165A is not
recorded in the assembly journal, but there is a record of the vote
by which Mr. Hall's motion to adopt the amendments proposed by
the committee on 'assessment and collection of taxes was rejected.
Here is the record as it appears in the journal of April 23, 1901 :

"Mr. Hall offered as amendment to No. 165A, the amendments re-
ported by the committee on assessment and collection of taxes.

"The yeas and nays being demanded, it was decided in the negative.

"The vote was as follows : Yeas, 39 ; nays, 50 ; absent or not voting,
9 ; paired 2.

"Yeas — Messrs. Anderson, Andrew, Babb, Barlow, Benson, Brunson,
Cady, Cleophas, Coapman, Oooli, Dahl, Dodge, Ela, Brickson, Fenelon,
Frost, Gilman, Haggerty, Hall, Hanson, Henry, Holland, Johnson (F.),
Johnson (H.), Keene, Kern, Lenroot, Meloney, Moldenhauer, Pomrening,
Rogers, Schellenberg, Smally, Spratt, Stevens, Sturdevant, Swenholt,
Thomas and Mr. Speaker — 39.

"Nays — Messrs. Barker, Burdeau, Clark, Collins, Dow, Duerrwaehter,
Eline, Esau, Evans (David, Jr.), Evans (Evan W.), Fessenfeld, Flaherty,
Gagnon, Galaway, Gawin, Hodgins, Jensen, Johnson, Jones, Karel, Katz.
Lane, McCabe, McCormiek, McGill, McMillan, Manuel, Miller (Edwin
A.), Miller (Herman), Norton, Orton, Owen, Park, Price, Rasmussen,
Roe, Root, Rossman, Sarau, Silkworth, Smith, Soltwedel, Steiger, Valen-
tine, Whitson, Williams (E. A.), Williams (J. C), Willott, Young and
Zinn — 50.

"Absent or not voting— Messrs. Ainsworth, Eager, Krumrey, McComb,
Middleton, Miner, Rankl, Slade and Theissenhusen— 9.

"Paired — Messrs. Overbeck and Hartung— 2.

"Mr. Overbeck, who would have voted yea, was paired with Mr.
Hartung, who would have voted nay.

"And the amendments were rejected.

"No. 165A was indefinitely postponed."

A similar fate met the other railroad bill. No. 164A, on May 2
by a vote of 45 in favor of engrossment and third reading and 51
against the motion. Thus the two bills prepared by the tax com-
mission, at the request of leading members of both houses, among
whom were Mr. Hall and Senators Whitehead, Kiordan, Eoehr and
others, were killed without the governor raising a finger to aid
them and after his own message had been used- to defeat them.

156 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE XIII.
The Goyeenor Becomes Active.

The primary election bill was killed in the senate April 11. On
April 34 the bill providing for an increase in the license fees paid
by the railroads was killed in the assembly, as has been stated. The
ad valorem railway taxation bill had been made a special order for
10 o'clock on May 2, in the assembly.

The defeat of his favorite primary measure manifestly roused
Gov. La Pollette to activity. On May 2 he sent to the assembly
his famous "dog tax veto," a document that proved to be the open-
ing gun of a verbal bombardment of the legislature that lasted
many months. The so-called dog tax bill was not a taxation meas-
ure, as a matter of fact, for it was designed to serve as a police
measure, and in form and effect was a dog license bill. But the
governor used this modest, shrinking little bill as a text for his tax-
ation sermon and his preachment was as strenuous, not to say sen-
sational, as it well could be. The legislature was given to under-
stand that the poor farmer's dog could not be taxed so long as the
great railroad corporations were escaping their just share of the
burdens of government. The language of that veto message fairly
sizzled, it was so hot.

This veto message was the first public utterance on the part of
the governor on the subject of taxation since the opening of the
legislative session, and it gave evidence of a complete change of
front on his part. While his biennial message did not openly and
in terms discredit the tax commission as a body, the use of the
figures furnished him by the commissioner of labor and industrial
statistics was of a character to signify doubt on his part of the
reliability of the statistics printed in the tax commission's report.
His subsequent silence, the known activity of some of his support-
ers in opposition to the bills prepared by the commission, and the
use made of the material taken from his message in the arguiaents
before the committees, all contributed to the defeat of the taxation
bills.

When he wrote his "dog tax veto" Gov. La Pollette was "as mad
as a hatter," for reasons already outlined. The tax commission sud-
denly became, in the eyes of the governor, an inspired authority,
and he demanded the passage of the measure providing for the tax- ■
ation of railroads on the ad valorem plan — the bill that had been
made a special order for 10 o'clock on the day his message was
transmitted to the assembly. In the Voters' Handbook, published
by the La Follette faction in 1903 as a campaign document, this
paragraph is found in reference to that veto message:

"This message was received and read to the assembly before the
vote was talien on the second railway taxation bill, and ought to have
reached the judgment and consciences of the members who were giving

Taxation Retoem in Wisconsin. 157

so little heed to the promises which had been made to the people in the
platform before the election."

The assembly met at 9 o'clock a. m., and the roll was called. The
routine business of the morning session was then taken up ; a reso-
lution was introduced and other resolutions considered; three bills
were introduced; the committee on state affairs, and the committee
on cities then reported on bills; the committee on engrossed bills
then reported. Then came a message from the governor giving a
list of bills which had received his approval and been filed with the
secretary of state. This message covers three pages of the journal.
Next comes the "dog tax veto" covering four and one-half pages
of the journal. Following the governor's message there was put the
question of sustaining the veto, and the assembly, by a vote of 6 to
83, refused to. pass the bill over his veto. Two messages from the
senate were then considered, and, the time' for the special order
having arrived, the ad valorem railroad taxation bill was taken up
for consideration, after which it was killed by a vote of 45 in favor
of its passage to a third reading to 51 nays.

A great noise was made because the "dog tax veto" did not save
the bill from destruction. By what course of reasoning did Gov.
La Pollette arrive at the belief that he could, after more than three
months' silence, come into the assembly less than an hour before the
time for action on a bill and save it ? The hearings before the com-
mittee had been public; members of both houses, intensely inter-
ested in the subjetft under consideration, had followed the argu-
ments of the men who appeared on both sides. They had given the
measures as much time and consideration as was possible in a period
of strenuous political warfare when factions were forming for a
long drawn out battle. "Was it reasonable to suppose they would
change their opinions at the eleventh — or, rather the twelfth — ^hour
at the behest of a man who had delayed three months in expressing
an opinion, even if he had formed one ?

The fact of the matter is that the taxation bills— all of them —
were sacrificed to the factional fight that was begun during the leg-
islative session of 1901, and, specifically, to the primary election bill.
Had there been no opposition to the primary election bill there
would have been no "dog tax veto ;" no executive verbal lashing of
the assembly for failure to keep promises made in the platform, no
sudden apotheosis of the -tax commission by a governor who had
artfully discredited the same body three months before.

That the fate of the bills was decided before the sensational
message was written is shown by the fact that on May 2, after
the ad valorem taxation bill was killed in the assembly, Senator
Whitehead, one of the fathers of the taxation measures, and also
one of the strongest and most consistent supporters of all the com-
mission bills, asked that the bills be withdrawn from the senate
files. Two days later Mr. Hall, chairman of the assembly com-

158 Political Kefobm in Wisconsin.

mittee, took the same action in the assembly. There is as much
reason to question the sincerity of Mr. Hall's support of these
measures as there is to accuse Senator MTiitehead of being false to
his professions of friendship for them. Both Whitehead and Hall
had worked for months to secure their passage. La Follette came
in after they had been killed or finally doomed and demanded
their passage. The support of Whitehead and Hall was based on
sincere desire to perfect the taxation laws. The tardy support of
La Pollette was born of anger because of his failure to pass his fa-
vorite primary election bill. The record is so plain that it does
not require extended comment in order to establish the truth of
these statements.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 159

CHAPTEE XIV.

A Conflict or Authority.

( Before criticising the members of either house for failure to
pass one or the other of the railway taxation bills at that session,
account should be taken of the peculiar situation at the time.
The first tax- commission had expressed the opinion that the li-
cense fee system based on the gross earnings of the roads, was not
securing results other taxpayers had a right to expect; the per-
manent tax commission had recommended that the license fee sys-
tem be retained and that the amount of the fee collected be in-
creased. Gov. La Follette, while refraining from offering any re-
commendations upon this specific point, endeavored to show by
statistics that 'the railroad corpora);ions were paying a higher rate
of taxes than owners of personal property. -

To this conflict of authority may be attributed in a measure
the inability of the legislature to arrive at a speedy and well de-
fined conclusion upon the subject under consideration. It should
also be remembered that the statistics furnished the legislature
by the governor and the figures supplied by the tax commission
did not agree. The members of the legislature were very much at
sea. When the two committees on assessment and collection of
taxes met in joint session this conflict became more and more ap-
parent as time passed. It is a significant fact that Mr. Hall, chair-
man of the assembly committee, the old war horse in the battle
for increased railway taxation, acted in concert with Senator
Whitehead, chairman of the senate committee, in withdrawing the
taxation bills from the files when it became apparent that they
could not be passed.

But the controversy, the discussion before the committees and
in the public press, had an educative value. While the legislature
could not come to a definite conclusion on the subject at that ses-
sion, the ground was prepared for future action. The obviously
wise course was chosen and the tax commission, the body that was
required to do the greater part of the work in solving the problem,
was given enlarged powers and duties. They were given the tools
to work with and instructed to build- a plan that would be fair and
just to all classes of taxpayers, one that would provide for an
equality of tax burdens. To the end that they might be provided
with authority to enforce the taxation laws then in effect, addition-
al penalties and punishments for violations of assessment laws by
assessing officers and property owners and for neglect of duty by
assessing officers were provided by chapter 379, laws of 1901, and
chapter 330 provided for the removal of assessing officers for viola-
tion of assessment laws or for neglect of official duty.

This is all the legislature could do at that session. It was all

160 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

the people had a right to expect of them in the circumstances.
Whatever delay resulted from this action was necessary in order
that future action might be based on an intelligent understanding
of the facts relating to the obstacles to be overcome and the best
method of overcoming them. The legislators were entitled at
that time to the privilege of reporting progress and asking for
time to complete their work.

There were three important measures however, that did not
fail of enactment by the legislature of 1901, two of which origi-
nated in the senate and one in the assembly. These were senate
bills Nos. 214 and 326, the former constituting the tax commis-
sion a state board of assessment and the latter defining and en-
larging the duties of that body. The assembly bill, No. 388,
created the office of county supervisor of assessments.

One of these bills, No. 236S, was recommended by Gov. La
FoUette in his message and prepared by the tax commission.
The other two, also drawn by the commissioners were not men-
tioned in the message. Special recommendations made by the
governor that the statistical work of the commission be taken from
that body and committed to the bureau of labor and industrial sta-
tistics and that the life of the commission as a state board be reduc-
ed to four years were ignored. His suggestions that the expenses
of the commission be limited to a specified sum was in part com-
plied with by fixing $10,000 as the maximum amount the com-
mission was allowed for clerk hire, traveling expenses, and other
disbursements.

The main purpose of the legislature in enacting the laws of
1901 appears to have been to do away with the evil of imdervalua-
tion and provide for the assessment of all property at its actual
cash value. To this end the hands of the tax commission were
strengthened, a new county office was created, and all assessment
and taxation officers were placed under the direct supervision of
the commission, upon whom the responsibility for the reform
was placed. This was believed to be the first important step to-
ward establishing an equitable and workable taxation system and
there do not appear to have been any radical differences of opinion
between the members of the two houses upon the subject. The
three bills in question were passed without opposition worthy of
mention.

It should be remembered that this was a time of unusual
political agitation and intense personal feeling growing out of
the contest over the primary election bill which failed of enact-
ment. It is impossible now, as it was impossible then, to determine
precisely to what extent and in what manner this fight affected the
proposed taxation legislation, but there are the best of reasons for
believing that, had the republican party been united and reason-

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 161

ably harmonious in purpose, more progress would have been made
during the 1901 session of the legislature.

Two of the taxation bills that failed of enactment are entitled
to especial mention because of the publicity given them, if for no
other cause. One was the Hartung dog tax bill, and the other the
Frost mortgage taxation bill. The former was brought into the
limelight by Gov. La Folletti's veto message. It was in reality
a police, and not a revenue measure. It was predicated on the
theory that dogs need regulation even if they are not public utili-
ties and that the proper way to regulate them was to enact a dog
license law with a statewide application.

This bill came to the governor at a time when he was smarting
over the defeat of the primary election bill, and it offered him an
opportunity to read the legislature a lecture on their alleged neglect
of duty in failing to pass one of the railway taxation bills that had
been defeated in the assembly. As has been explained, the second
railway bill, the one that provided for the taxation of railway pro-
perty on/ an ad valorem basis, was pending in the assembly, a,nd
had been made a special order of business for the morning the dog
tax veto was received. This bill was not of enough importance to
entitle it to create discussion. It passed the assembly by a vote of
53 to 36 on the roll call, and in the senate the roll was not even
called, the bill being concurred in without opposition.

The Frost mortgage taxation bill, however, was a more import-
ant measure. It had been prepared by Assemblyman Fred J.
Frost after a careful study of the Massachusetts law of 1881. The
purpose of this bill was to avoid double taxation which was inevit-
able where the mortgaged property was assessed at its full value
and the mortgage assessed separately, as was the case under the ex-
isting laws. This measure passed both houses with little or no
opposition, the assembly committee on assessment and collection
of taxes and the senate judiciary committee having given it their
approval. The vote in the assembly on roll call was 58 for, and 11
against. TJie roll was not called in the senate.

Gov. La Follette returned the Frost bill with a veto message
in which he explained that he objected to the measure for two rea-
sons. His first objection was that injustice would result from the
provision by which the two parties to a mortgage were permitted
to agree between themselves as to which one should pay the tax;
the second objection was that the law would be unconstitutional
as it would violate the rule of uniformity. The friends of the
measure were unable to pass it over the gorvernor's veto and it
died.

AVTiile the question of constitutionality, raised by the governor
in this case, has never been passed upon by the court, there is good
reason to believe his point was well taken, notwithstanding the

162 Political Reform in WisconsiK.

fact that the Massachusetts law had been in force for twenty years.
On this particular point the governor said:

Another section of the bill declares that its provisions shall not apply
to or affect mortgages executed prior to the time this act shall take effect,
which time is fixed in the bill on Jan. 1, 1902. It follows if the agree-
ment to pay the taxes is made by the mortgagor, that mortgages exe-
cuted prior to Jan. 1, 1902, are to be^ taxed as personal property accord-
ing to the existing rules of law, while Aose made subsequent to that date
are wholly exempt from taxation, because the real estate is to be taxed
at its true value both before and after that date, and after that date
the mortgage executed is made a part of the real estate for assessment
purposes. On the other hand, if a mortgage should be given after Jan. _
1, 1902, and agreement to pay all taxes on the real estate is not made '
by the mortgagor, then the real estate is assessed at its true value, less
the true value of the mortgage, but if the mortgage shall have been
executed prior to that date, and none since, upon the same parcel of real
estate, it is to be assessed at its true value without any reduction
whatever, on account of the mortgage, which also is to be assessed at its
true value.

"In my judgment, it is not permissible, under the constitutional pro-
vision quoted, either to tax mortgages executed prior to a certain date
and to exempt those executed after that date, or to tax real estate upon
which a mortgage has been executed prior to a certain date without any
reduction on account of the mortgage debt and to deduct from the true
value of similar property similarly situated the value of a mortgage
executed subsequent to such date in making assessments for taxation
purposes."

This reads like good law, and, in the absence of the court de-
cision required to confirm or reject it, it is fair to assume that
Gov. La FoUette believed his constitutional objection was a sound
one. But subsequent events demonstrated that the governor's
chief objectix)n to the proposed statute was not a constitutional one.
His first and main objection to the Frost bill was that it permitted
the mortgagor to enter into a contract to pay the taxes on the prop-
erty, inclusive of the mortgaged interest. He objected to the
two interests being consolidated for taxation purposes. It was the
mortgagee he was after — ^the man who had money to loan — not the
tax on the property. Granting the unconstitutionality of the
Frost bill, the fact still remains that Gov. La Follette at that time
aad later fought for the principle of taxing the men who loaned
money and not the "property, or moneyiinvested in the property.

This question came up two years later and resulted in a mort-
gage taxation law.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 163

CHAPTER XV.
The Campaign of 1902.

If ever the taxation question may be said to have been an issue
that period was in 1903, but there is only a shadow of an excuse
for asserting that it was an issue even then. Because there was so
much talk and so many columns of printed matter all devoted to
the subject it does not follow that there was a well defined polit-
ical contest waged by two or more contending factions support-
ing specific policies with respect to the taxation problem.
As a matter of fact, there was an abundance of discussion and con-
troversy, but it was mainly devoted to elementary principles.
The state of Wisconsin may be said to have been sitting in the pri-
mary class in economics during that memorable campaign and
listening to some astounding statements of alleged principles of
taxation.

• For instance, it was solemnly argued by one or more promi-
nent adminstration newspapers that the taxation of mortgages at
their face value and the taxation of the mortgaged property at its
full value without deduction on account- of the mortgage was not
double taxation. Also certain members of the legislature attempt-
ed to show that the mortgagee, being a capitalist whose money
was invested in interest bearing securities, should be taxed at the
uniform rate of taxation on all his evidences of debt, as that was
a definite evidence of the amount of his investment, without re-
spect to the fact that the property upon which the debt was se-
cured must be taxed, as it is tangible and easily assessable.

There were also demands made that the capital stock of all cor-
porations be taxed in the hands of the stockholders, even where
the corporation was taxed on its property. It was argued also that,
notwithstanding the experience of other states to the contrary,
it would be possible to hunt out and assess millions of dollars of
taxable intangible property that always had escaped the assessors.

Lastly, there was a dispute as to the method of taxing railway
property. Two tax commissions had expressed the opinion that
the transportation companies were not paying their full share of
the taxes collected in this state. The question was : Should the plan
of taxing these corporations be changed from the license fee sys-
tem to the ad valorem method ? If the license fee system were to
be retained it was a foregone conclusion that, with the leadership
of the tax commission to guide them, the legislature would in-
evitably increase the percentage on gross earnings. There were
many who believed this would be the best plan, as the license fee
system was simple, almost automatic in its operations, and the
amount of the taxes collected from the transportation companies

164 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

Gould be increased at any time the demands of the state required
by simply increasing the percentage, or amount of the fee.

There were no well defined lines drawn between political part-
ies or fac,tions with respect to these questions. The campaign
literature circulated for the instruction of the voters does not dis-
close: any definite, propositions for a change of method in taxing
any class of property. The adminstration ' newspapers and cam-
paign circulars and books charged their opponents with responsi-
bility for. the defeat of the railway taxation bills in 1901, but it
is impossible to discover which of the two bills — the one providing
for an ad valorem assessment and the other for an increase in the
license fee on gross earnings — was the one claimed to have been
favored by Gov. La PoUette and his followers. As the governor
himself did not come to the support of either of these measures
until they were defeated in fact or in effect, no man can tell which
one of the bills would have best satisfied him.

That the demand for taxation reform was almost unanimous
in this state can not truthfully be denied. That the distinguish-
ing characteristic of the public discussion of the subject during
that year was dense ignorance of the fundamental principles of
economics is disclosed by the columns of the newspapers and the
campaign literature circulated during the campaign. About all
the definite information to be had was contained in the first re-
port of the tax commission, and that report was confessedly in-
complete, as the commission had not been given time to do more
than dip into the subject and come out with a few facts and statis-
tics that were merely suggestive of what a thorough investigation
would disclose.

The statement that there was no issue on the subject of tax-
ation in the campaign of 1902, is subject, however, to one qualifi-
cation : As a rule the administration faction did demand more
taxes, while the stalwart or conservative demand was for more in-
formation. It was conceded by all that large amounts of property
were escaping taxation wholly or in part. The conservatives want-
ed to proceed intelligently and along scientific lines in correcting
the inequalities and thus avoid greater evils than those from which
they were fleeing. The administration faction was for taxing
everybody right and left regardless of consequences, but, during
the campaign at least, they did not offer any specific plan for put-
ting their promises of increased revenues into operation. As a
means of arousing interest in their campaign there was much talk
of the excessive burden borne by the farmer whose property was
easily found and assessed, while the capitalist was escaping taxation.
The owner of urban realty, who was then and is now the heaviest
taxpayer in the state, came in for little sympathy.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 165

CHAPTEK XVI.
Commission Eepoets Progress.

When the legislature of 1903 convened the situation had
changed somewhat. The tax commission was prepared to answer
many of the questions that had puzzled members of the legislature
at previous sessions. It had studied the situation in this state and
the experience .of other states to some purpose and was prepared
to offer advice, bacl^ed by definite facts and statistics in justifica-
tion of the course of reasoning and conclusions upon which the atl-
vice was based. The commissioners had supplemented their first-
two years of study by another biennial period of investigation and
research. They now came to the legislature with the results of
nearly four years of hard work. They were men of exceptional
abilities, trained minds, and an ambition to give the state good
service in the particular field to which they had been appointed.
The legislature of 1901, recognizing the necessities of the situa-
tion, had given them enlarged powers, thereby enabling them to
test the old taxation system under the most favorable conditions.

The report of the Wisconsin tax commission made in 1903
justly has been reguarded as one of the most valuable contribu-
tions to taxation literature in print. It is a volume of 360 pages,
and contains matter of general as well as local interest. On the
subjects of "The Inheritance Tax," "Taxation of Credits," and
"Taxation of Railways" in particular, the treatment was so exhaus-
tive, the analyses so clear and convincing that they carried con-
viction to the minds of the legislators, or at least, to the minds of
all members who permitted sound reason to control their ofSeial
actions. *

The tax commission believed the law taxing inheritances,
enacted in 1899 but declared unconstitutional by the Supreme
court, should be corrected to comply with the suggestions of the
court and re-enacted. Nearly forty pages of the report are devot-
ed to this subject, the commission explaining that the decision of
the Supreme court did not in any sense reflect upon the right of
the state to levy an inheritance tax, the defect in the law being
merely technical and one that easily could be removed. The com-
missioners later presented a bill which was enacted into law and
became cTiapter 44, laws of 1903. There was no opposition to this
bill. No. 331S, as Gov. La FoUette approved of it in his message.
The Supreme court, in declaring the law of 1899 to be unconsti-
tutional, had said :

"We have reached this conclusion reluctantly. We should far rather
have sustained the law, but the conclusion has been forced upon us.
We agree with tfie general principles which have been approved by an
overwhelming weight of authority in the courts in this country in refer-
ence to inheritaace and succession tax laws."

166 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

The bill was passed and became the law of the state. It was
attacked in the courts but the Supreme court sustained it and it
is now in force. There was no political issue concerning the in-
heritance tax laWj at least.

The controversy over the taxation of credits however, came
near to the point of becoming a political issue. The tax commis-
sioners themselves failed to agree on a unanimous report relating
to this subject. Commissioner Nils P. Haugen presenting a brief
dissenting report, covering but two pages, in which he gave five
reasons why he believed credits should not be exempted from tax-
ation by law.

The chapter devoted to taxation of credits in the main report
in which were incorporated the opinions of Commissioners Gilson
and Curtis covers fifty-six pages of the report, and is devided into
four parts, as follows: "Status of the law;" "Statistics and
Comment;" "Fundamental Principles;" "Legislation in Other
States." It is this particular chapter that called forth the most
enthusiastic indorsement of the commission's work on the one hand
and the sharpest criticism on the other. The failure in this and
other states to uncover and assess all forms of credits was not the
only reason urged by the commission and the friends of credit ex-
emptions for an abandonment of the attempt. It was shown, or
argued, at least, that credits were not property in any proper sense
of the term. In most cases they merely represented property that
was assessed and taxed in the hands of the owner. In this respect
mortgages were not unique, for many other forms of credits were
merely evidences of a debt owed by somebody. If that somebody was
solvent the debt was a lien on his property ; if he was insolvent, the
debt was worthless and should not be taxed because it had no value.
It is impossible here to go into the arguments used at length. Per-
sons who are interested will find the report of the Wisconsin tax
commission for the year 1903 worth reading.

On the other hand, the opponents of credit exemptions, un-
der the leadership of Gov. La Follette, were determined that in-
tangible property, including all forms of credits, should be taxed.
There is an impression prevalent among a large number of citi-
zens who have given the matter little serious thought, that, insome
mysterious manner never explained, the burden of taxation rests
mainly upon the poor people of the state while the wealthy owners
of credits escape. If they are owners of credits they must be
wealthy, and, conversely, if they are wealthy they must be OTraers
of credits. Ergo, if credits are exempted from taxation the
wealthy owner of credits will escape taxation. Probably one of the
clearest explanations of this popular idea is the one found in Gov.
La FoUette's message to the legislature in 1903. He said:

"With the rapid accumulation of wealth, the increase in the amount
and value of intangible property but strengthens year by year-the reason

Taxation Uefobm in Wisconsin. 167

and justice of its taxation in some form. Tlie vast accumulations of
wealtli may be invested in interest bearing securities, insuring large
incomes to the holders who throw their share of the expense of main-
taining streets and schools and public institutions, and all the burdens
of municipal and state government upon the owners of factories and
shops, and stores and farms and homes, violates every principle of
equal rights and equal responsibilities guaranteed to American citizens."

That is the understanding of the situation upon which la
founded the proposition to tax credits. On the other hand, the
opponents of credit taxation explain that the "factories and shops
and stores and farms and homes," together with a few other
classes of property like the transportation lines, the mines, timber
lands and unused agricultural lands, both of which a,re supposed
to be adding an unearned increment of value yearly to their worth,
are really the basis of all the credits of the country. A debt that is
secured, if it be wealth "invested in interest bearing securities," is
represented somewhere by tangible property, even if the evidence of
debt be intangible. To tax the tangible property at its full value
and then tax the intangible security that merely repi'esents a right
to demand payment from the owner of that property, is double
taxation.

But this was not what Gov. La Follette and those who followed
him proposed to do with real estate mortgages. They argued that
the value of the mortgage should be deducted from the assessment
of the mortgaged property, the mortgagee being required to pay
the taxes on his interest in the property represented by the mort-
gage instrument. They would not agree to permit the two parties
to the business transaction to eilter into a contract by which the
mortgagor should obligate himself to pay the taxes. They were de-
termined to force the mortgagee to pay the taxes on his mortgage.
It was the man they were after, not merely the tax on property.
This was one of the vital defects — as viewed by the governor — in
the Frost mortgage taxation bill of 1901. It was the point in con-
troversy in the legislature of 1903 and one over which there was a
threatened deadlock between the two houses, the assembly, where
Gov. La Follette held a majority, and the senate, where the con-
servatives were in control.

The controversy finally resulted in the enactment of a law that,
in effect, exempted the mortgage from taxation as recommended
by the tax commission, by permitting the two interests to be taxed
together. This was not the intention of the original authors of the
bill, 'No. 6 62 A, which was drawn with the distinct idea of holding
the mortgagee strictly to account for his share of the tax by making
it unlawful for the two parties to the mortgage to enter into an
agreement whereby the mortgagor should pay the entire tax. The
bill passed the assembly in this form, was amended by the senate,
and finally went to a conference committee, where it was perma-
nently amended. That law has remained practically unchanged
until the present.

168 PoLiTicAi, Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE XVII.
Ad Valorem Eailway Taxation in 1903.

The most important work of the legislature of 1903, however,
was the passage of the ad valorem railway taxation bill. As has
been explained, the subject of railroad taxation had been con-
tinuously before the legislature in one form or another for ten years,
or since A. E. Hall first proposed to investigate the records of the
companies to assertain whether they were reporting their gross
earnings honestly. The first tax commission had reported in 1899
that it was of opinion the railroads were not paying their just share
of the taxes. The tax commission in 1901 had made a similar re-
port, but recommended that the license fee system be retained un-
til such time as more definite information on the subject could be
secured.

' In 1903, however, the commission reported strongly in favor
of an ad valorem assessment of all railroad property for the pur-
poses of taxation. It suggested that the license fee system be re-
tained for a term of years ; that an ad valorem assessment of rail-
road property be made each year and the tax computed oh the as-
sessed valuation at the rate paid by the general property of the state ;
that if the license fee collected amounted to more than the tax
computed on the assessment" of the property, the excess be
returned to the company paying such excess; should the license
fee be less than the amount of the tax computed on the ad valorem
plan, the company should be required to pay the balance.

Gov. La Eollette also recommended that the ad valorem system
of taxing railway property be adopted. He scolded the legislature
of 1903 in round terms for the failure of the legislatures of 1899
and 1901 to solve the taxation problem. He told them they had
nothing to consider — all the considering had been attended to by
what he believed to be the proper body. There was only one thing
for the legislature to do^ and that was to pass the bill prepared for
them by the tax commission and let it go at that. One of the-
most interesting paragraphs in that extraordinarily interesting
message is worth reproducing here because of its dogmatic, arbi-
trary tone. It is not likely there will be found in the state records
before or since the La Follette period any instance where a legis-
lature was told in such definite and unequivocal terms what it was
expected to do with respect to certain legislation. The governor
said:

"Effort may be further continued to obstruct the course of justice.
These failing, as a last resort efforts will be made to compromise. There
has been given into our hands a trust to discharge. Differences of
opinion may arise in the performance of public duty upon questions of
policy. This is not a question of policy. The railroad companies of this
state owe the state more than $1,000,000 a year. For many years, because

Taxation Refoem in Wisconsin. 169

of the postponement or defeat of legislation requiring them to pay their
proportionate share of the taxes, the other taxpayers of Wisconsin have
paid for them $1,000,000 annually. The case has been tried, the hearing
has been full. Judgment has been given again and again. Pledges have
been made by political parties, and repeated by candidates for office, over
and over again. The question is not an open one. There is no oppor-
tunity for misunderstanding. There is no room for speculation. The
truth is ascertained. The truth is known. It is lodged in the public
mind to stay. The people want $1,000,000 a year, because it is the sum
owing. They are not to be wheedled by any soft phrases about "con-
servatism." There is nothing to compromise. Equal and just taxation
is a fundamental principle of republican government. The amount due
. as taxes from railroads and other public service corporations should be
paid, and paid in full, and I am confident the legislation to secure that
payment will be promptly enacted.

"I recommend that the Mil formulated iy the tax commission in ac-
cordance with their report, pursuant to the law creating that iody, and
presented hy them to the legislature, le passed promptly, and that there
may be no uncertainty I now say that a measure creating a state board
of assessment to determine the value of railroad property, and applying
to railroad companies and other public service corporations the same rate
of taxation which other taxable property pays in this state, will be
promptly approved by the executive, if given the opportunity." ■

Complaint had been made the previous year that Gov. La Fol-
lette had attempted to usurp the privileges and functions of the
legislative branch of the state government, or at least to dictate
to the legislature in an arbitrary and unlawful manner. That com-
plaint was not without foundation in fact. That the governor did
not take seriously the constitutional limitation placed upon his
activities as a public servant is shown by his attempt to dictate what
the action of the two houses should be with respect to the proposed
railway taxation legislation.

The tax commission, it is true, had recommended that the ad
valorem system be adopted. The members of that body had given
the subject careful consideration. They had, so far as they were
able without the assistance of expert engineers, made a complete-
valuation of all the railroads in the state and estimated the amount
of taxes they would have been required to pay had they been as-
sessed at the rates paid by owners of other classes of property tax-
ed on an ad valorem assessment. Sixty-seven pages of the commis-
sion's report was devoted to the subject of railroad taxation. The
commissioners had attempted to avoid error by working out the
problem in different ways. They had made what they believed to
be a fair valuation of the property by ascertaining the market va-
Jue of the stocks and bonds of the several roads for terms of years,
taking the average value of those securities for three, five and
seven year periods respectively. They then took the net earnings
of the roads and capitalized them at 6 per cent. In this way they
had arrived at the conclusion that had the railroads been taxed
on the ad valorem plan in 1903 they would have paid approximate-

170 Political Befokm in Wiscosrsm.

ly $2,652,590.62, instead of $1,711,900.18, the amount they did

pay-
But the tax commission was not in a position to ask the legis-
lature to accept its conclusions as final, nor did it presume to do
so. It is a principle of republican government that when any citi-
zen's interests are being considered by the state he is entitled to a
hearing. Every taxpayer has his day before the board of review
if he is disposed to demand it. From the beginning it has been con-
ceded that when the legislature is in session and important mat-
ters are pending before it, citizens whose interests are likely to be
affected by the enactment of laws or the defeat of measures are en-
titled to appear before legislative committees and be heard. This
was what the tax commission had supposed would be done. This
was what the members of the legislature proposed to do. This was
what all legislatures previously had done when undertaking im-
portant legislation.

Although Gov. La Follette informed the legislature that a bill
had been, or would be, formulated by the tax commission which
he expected would be passed without hesitation, the fact is the com-
mission was not ready when the session convened to present a bill.
They had performed their work conscientiously and believed their
conclusions were correct, but they felt that, before a final decision
could be reached that would answer all the demands of justice and
fair play, the representatives of the corporations whose interests
would be affected should be heard.

This was the course adopted. Notices of joint hearings by the
committees of the two houses were sent to the ofBcers of. all the rail-
roads in Wisconsin with a request that the presidents and attorneys
of the roads attend in person and present the arguments of the cor-
porations, if the proposed plan of taxing the roads on an ad valor-
em assessment should be objectionable to them. This course was
adopted because there had been so much complaint during recent
years concerning the railroad "lobby." These complaints had been
made on the stump, in the administration newspapers, and in cam-
paign -literature. The "lobbyists" were represented to be men
without consciences, responsibility, or principle. They were class-
ed as "hired men" whose business it was to defeat all kinds of legis-
lation that, in their opinion, might be detrimental to their em-
ployers and of advantage to the people. A conference with the
lobbyists, therefore, was not desired by the committeemen. They
wanted the railroad presidents and heads of the legal departments
at their meetings if possible. Such a conference could not fail to
enlighten both the members of the committees . and the heads of
the transportation companies and contribute to a better under-
standing.

The first meeting was held in the committee room of the senate
COffimittee on assessniejjt aji4 cojlectign of ^taxes PB Feb. H, 1903,

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 171

there being present at the conference the committees of both
houses, the members of the tax commission. Judge Gilson and
Messrs. Curtis and Haugen, and officers of the several railroads
doing business in Wisconsin. The Northwestern road was repre-
sented by President Marvin Hughitt and General Council Lloyd
Bowers; President Earling and General council George E. Peck
represented the Milwaukee road ; T. H. Gill attended to the inter-
ests of the Wisconsin Central. The Burlington road was repre-
sented by W. W. Baldwin, assistant to the president. The small-
er roads entrusted their interests to Norman James, president
of the Wisconsin Western, or Kickapoo Valley road; H. A. J.
Upham, who represented the stockholders of that road, and H. 0.
Pairchild, attorney for the Green Bay and Western.

It is not the intention here to review the arguments urged for
and against the ad valorem system of taxation. It is sufficient to
say that the officers of the railroads made a presentation of their
case in a very temperate, conservative manner. One of the prin-
cipal arguments and the one that appeared to be presented with
the greatest confidence in its soundness and conclusiveness, was
the statement by President Earling of the Milwaukee road that the
railroads of Wisconsin paid one-eleventh of all the taxes collected
in this state. He did not believe the roads owned one-eleventh of
all the property in the state. Both Mr. Hughitt and Mr. Earling
explained that in the states where the ad valorem assessment policy
was in force the results were neither profitable to the states nor
satisfactory to the railroad companies.

If the tax commission had- already prepared a tentative bill at
that time for presentation to the committee nothing was said at
this meeting of that fact. That the members of the commission
had outlined such a measure was generally understood, but they
wanted to hear from the railroad officers before they presented it.
They did not think "the case has been tried, and the hearing has
been full ;" that "judgment has been given again and again."
They wanted to hear the other side of the case and gather what in-
formation they could from the testimony. This conference was
the final hearing and the commission was then prepared definitely
to recommend a bill to the two houses. A full report of the pro-
ceedings of the conference was presented to the senate by the com-
mittee on Feb. 18, and printed in the Senate Journal of that date,
on pages 313 to 349. Other hearings were held later which were
attended by the railroad officials, at which the details of the bill
were gone through with item by item, but no official reports of
these conferences were printed in the records.

The reader should bear in mind that the governor, in his mes-
sage had spoken in the highest terms of the tax commission and
recommended the bill "to be formulated" by that body as one that
should be acted upon without delay. The case had been tried, he

172 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

said. There was nothing to consider. Xhe tax commission had
settled the entire dispute and they had embodied their conclusions
in a bill that must be passed at once.

The tax commission bill, No. 332S., was introduced in the sen-
ate by the committee on assessment and collection of taxes on Feb.
13, two days after the conference with the railroad officials. This
bill was introduced without change of any kind. It was the iden-
tical bill prepared by the commission. In it were embodied the re-
sults, of nearly four years of careful investigation by the commis-
sion. As the commission would, under the operations of the meas-
ure, be charged with the duty of making an assessment of rail-
road property and computing the tax that must be paid on that
assessment, the sections of the bill in which provision was made for
assessing the property were drawn with particular care, as it was
the determination of the commissioners to so do their work that it
would stand the test in the highest court.

On the same day assembly bill No. 600 was introduced by the
committee on assessment and collection of taxes in that house.
This bill was a duplicate of the one introduced in the senate with
three important exceptions. The senate bill provided for an as-
sessment in the year 1903 for the taxes of 1904; the assembly bill
provided for an assessment in the year 1903 for the taxes of 1903.
By the senate bill the commission was required to make and com-
plete the assessment by the first day of December, 1903 ; the assem-
bly bill required that the assessment be completed by August 1,
1903. The senate bill provided that, after completing the assess-
ment the commission should meet as a board of review in Decem-
ber, giving the railroad officials an opportunity to appear and show
cause why the assessment should be changed, if any cause could
be found; the assembly bill made no provision for a review of the
assessment. The senate bill was referred to the committee on as-
sessment and collection of taxes of that house and was never heard
from again until it was withdrawn from the flies by unanimous
consent on May 30.

The tax commission bill, the one recommended in his message
by the governor, manifestly did not receive the support and coun-
tenance of the gover;ior's faction. On the contrary, the men who
were in Gov. La FoUette's confidence, who were nearest to him in
the private, not to say secret, councils of his party, were the meni
who were behind the mutilated bill that was introduced in the as-
sembly. They were the men who, on Feb. 38, were instrumental
in having an amendment to bill No. 600A, reported, one that was
intended to correct the manifest error already pointed out in the
original bill by which the companies were not given an opportun-
ity to appear before the commission sitting as a board of review,
but which they made a bad matter worse by providing that the

Taxation Rei'oem in Wisconsin. 173

assessment be completed by the fourth Wednesday in June — a
physical impossibility.

This amendment to No. 600A, was reported by the committee
on Saturday, Feb. 38, just as the house was about to adjourn so
that members could leave for their homes. On Monday it was
printed and placed on the desks of members, but there was little
business transacted that day. The entire proceedings of the day
do not cover four full pages of the journal.

On Tuesday, March 3, the bill appeared on the assembly calen-
dar for the first time, and, as it was understood that amendments
would be offered, the consideration of the matter was made a. spe-
cial order for the following day, Wednesday, March 4, at 10 o'clock
a. m. On Wednesday the expected amendments were offered, and
voted down and the bill was ordered to engrossment and third read-
ing. On Friday, March 6, less than a week from the time the
amendments were introduced, during which time there were hut
four working days, this bill, the most important measure before the
legislature and containing provisions that had never, been consid-
ered by the tax commission or by the committees on assessment and
-collection of taxes of the two houses, was passed by the assembly
and "put up to the senate."

It was reported at the time that the amendments to,, and
changes in the assembly bill were the work of the tax commission.
As a matter of fact the head of the commission. Judge Gilson, did
draw the amendments at the request of certain administration
leaders, but he gave it to be understood that he did not approve
of them. He made no secret of the fact that lie distinctly and
emphatically disapproved of them. As it was a well known fact that
the administration leaders in the assembly did not make any im-
portant moves without the consent of Gov. La , Follette, it thus
becomes clear that the governor himself was behind the 'attempt
to ignore the recommendations of the commission. Had this at-
tempt been successful a law would have been enacted that would
have been impossible of enforcement and the courts would not have
upheld it, thereby causing another delay of two years.

17i Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE XVIII.

How AN Agreement was Eeachbd.

It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the administration
members were playing politics with this bill. There was at this
time no opposition to the proposed change of policy with respect
to the taxation of railroad property recommended by the tax com-
mission. It was conceded on all hands that the investigations by the
commission, the conclusions reached and reports made by that
body, had rendered such a change imperative. Even the officers
of the railroads who took part in the conferences mentioned under-
stood this fact. It is true they formally presented their arguments
in favor of the license fee system, but it is equally true that they
were reasonably certain the ad valorem system would be substitut-
ed for the license fee system by the legislature. While they opposed
the change, they felt that under certain conditions that might
reasonably be expected to arise the ad valorem system would be the
better of the two, even from the standpoint of their own interests.
There was no limit beyond which the license fee on gross earnings
might not be raised. The amount of the fee was left to the determi-
nation of the legislature alone. It was not difficult to believe the
time might come when the license fee, increased by the legislature to
6 per cent or more on gross earnings, largely expanded by the in-
creased development of the country's resources, would prove to be
a heavy burden.

But in "playing politics" with the taxation bill for the purpose
of "putting it, up to the senate" and manufacturing campaign thun-
der the assembly administration men made a fatal error from a "rec- ■
ord" standpoint. They passed a bill containing directions with
which the tax commission would not have been able to comply in
making the first assessment of railroad property. It would have
been a physical impossibility for the commission to put a valuation
on Wisconsin railroad property in the time allowed. No amount of
help and no available funds that might be provided would make it
possible for them to undertake and complete the work within the
time specified.

Up to the time they began the preparation of the bill introduced
in the -senate, the tax commission had made two estimates of the
value of the railroad property in this state, one reported to the leg-
islature in 1901 and the other in 1903. These estimates were in-
tended to aid the legislature in determining for itself whether the
railroad companies were bearing their fair proportion of the tax
burdens.

But estimating the value of an entire class of property for the
purposes of a legislature and making detailed assessments of that
property for taxation purposes are two different matters. One may

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 175

be approximately correct only, the other must be demonstrably cor-
rect; one may be made without the knowledge or consent of the
owner, in making the other the owner must be afforded every facil-
ity to be heard in order to satisfy the common rules of justice. In
making an estimate of the value of the property of the railroads
the stock and bond valuation and the capitalization of the net in-
come were the simplest and most satisfactory means of arriving at
the desired results. But in making an assessment for the purposes
of taxation, it became necessary to place a valuation on all the
physical property of the several roads — their rights of way, rolling
stock and equipment of all kinds, as well as on their franchises. It
was worse than foolish to expect the work to be completed in the
time specified in the bill.

Gov. La FoUette had said in his message that no more delays
would be permitted. The case had been tried, he asserted, and
judgment had beeii rendered. The state wanted $1,000,000 a year
more from the railroads than they had been paying in the past.
By forcing the tax commission to adopt its previous estimates of
the value of railroad property without further verification or pos-
sible correction, without the necessary valuation of the physical
property of the roads, the demand of the governor for $1,000,000 a
year would be met, provided the courts did not interfere. There
was the rub. The courts would have interfered to prevent the en-
forcement of such a loosely drawn, imperfect measure.

It may be of interest here to cite the fact that, during the entire
controversy between the factions in this state, there was a small but
respectable number among conservatives who were in favor of pass-
ing any measures the administration faction might propose. It was
argued that the radical element was in control of the administration
forces and that they were so extravagantly radical that they would
never be able to prepare a measure that would stand the test of the
courts. The bills they prepared were designed to "catch" some
class of citizens or some industry and "fix" them. Naturally this
was not the explanation given by the friends of these measures as a
reason for their presentation or introduction, but the facts were
well known. The primary election bill was designed to "catch"
and "fix" the politicians and "bosses" on the other side, in the
other faction. The railway taxation bill was designed to "catch"
the railroad companies and "fix" them to the tune of $1,000,000 a
year more than they were then paying. Eailway rate regulation
bills also were drawn with a" view of taking over practically the
entire management of the transportation lines and placing it in the
hands of a state board.

Had the conservative element in the legislature — or, more accu-
rately speaking, the senate, for the conservatives in the assembly in
1903 did not exert any influence on the work of that house — ^per-
mitted the radicals of the sssembly to enact into statute laws the

176 Political Rbfobm in Wisconsin.

"reform" bills prepared and presented by the administration leaders
and committees without amendment or objection, the people of Wis-
consin would have been treated to the most remarkable illustration
of the destructive tendency of hasty and ill advised legislation of
modern times. As a matter of fact, the administration men devel-
oped a positive genius for blunders in framing bills and an equally
remarkable genius for evading the consequences of their blunders in
being helped out of their difficulties by conservative amendments.
This statement holds.good when applied to the entire period of con-
troversy and to every important subject of legislation considered
during that time, with the single exception of the primary election
law. The radicals were bent on rushing to destruction; the con-
servatives held them back and guided them by a safe path around
the dangers that beset them. The goal was finally reached in spite
of — ^not because of — the intemperance of the radicals who claimed
all the credit for progress made. They even adopted the title
"Progressive" as one peculiarly fitting their own exalted personali-
ties, while they assigned to their guides the reproachful designa-
tion, "Eeactionaries."

^s was usual, the conservatives of the senate, with the aid and
consent of the tax commission, be it known, prepared a series of
amendments to the railway taxation bill when it came up in that
house. With one exception the senate amendments finally were
accepted by the assembly. That single exception was the proposal
to exempt from taxation the bonds of railroad companies. The tax
commission had, in computing the value of the railroad property in
this state, taken as a basis for their figures the value of the stocks
and bonds of the companies for periods of three, five, and seven
years. It was considered fair and just to exempt those bonds from
taxation in the hands of individual owners after having included
them in the assessment of the railroad property and taxed them to
the company itself. This was the action recommended by the tax
commission and urged by the senate committee, but the assembly
refused to accept the amendment and the senate withdrew it rather
than defeat the bill altogether.

Senate amendments that were accepted by the assembly, how-
ever, were important in that they removed the main objections to
the bill. The time given the commissioners to complete the first
assessment of the property of the Wisconsin railroads was extended
from August 1, 1903, to December 1, 1903, as was also the time for
fixing the valuation of the real and personal property of the state
for the purpose of computing the rate of taxation to be applied to
railroad property. The proposition to levy a tax on the ad valorem
plan in the year 1903 was abandoned, it being determined that the
first assessment, made in 1903, should be used to determine the
amount of the taxes for 1904, and the taxes in 1905 should be
based on the assessment of 1904.

Taxation Refobm in Wisconsin. 177

There were a number of minor amendments proposed by the
senate and accepted by the assembly, but it is unnecessary to give
them in full. It is sufficient to say that they were all drawn by
the tax commission and they were all designed to strengthen the
measure. The tax commission also prepared the amendment ex-
empting railroad bonds from taxation, which was rejected by the
assembly.

In order that there may be no doubt about the position taken
by the so-called "reactionaries" with respect to the ad valorem
railway taxation bill, the following quotation from the official
records is given at some length. This excerpt is taken from the
report of the conference committee on No. 600A, and will be found
on page 1054 of the Senate Journal, exhibit B. senate reply in
writing to the propositions of the assembly conferees :

"4. Senate conferees once more call attention to the origin of bill
No. 600A, and of the senate amendments thereto. The tax commission-
ers prepared a bill in manifold copies entitled, 'A bill to provide for the
taxation of railroads and making an appropriation therefor.' One of
these copies was transmitted to the committee on assessment and col-
lection of taxes in each house for introduction, and on the same day
the copy received by the senate committee was introduced without any
changes whatever, as bill No. 332S, and the copy received by the assem-
bly committee was introduced with a number of amendments as bill No.
600A. Section 25 of this bill was not changed by the assembly commit-
tee before its introduction, and the section appears both in bill No. 332S,
and in bill No. 600A, as printed, as the senate would have it appear in
amended bill No. 600A. All of the amendments proposed by the senate
were prepared by the tax commissioners and in accordance with their
judgment of the amendments required to enable the senate to make the
bill what it ought to be, and senate conferees have no more hesitation in
urging assembly conferees to accept the rejected amendment than they
would have had in insisting upon concurrence in any of the other amend-
ments offered to and concurred in by the assembly. The bill in its
present amended form (including the rejected amendment to section 25),
is the bill contemplated in the report of the tax commissioners, and
senate conferees insist that both senate and assembly are obligated to
enact it as a law. In his biennial message to the legislature, Gov. La
Follette said

" 'You will soon be in possession of the report of the tax commission.
It represents nearly four years of labor by the able members of that
body without bias or prejudice, .prompted solely by a desire conscien-
tiously to discharge high official obligation. I am confident you will
place a reliance upon the work of this commission that the public has
already sealed with its approval. If the inauguration of the investiga-
tion of this subject by the commission was in good faith, then in good
faith those for whose guidance its work was planned are bound to give
heed to its findings and recommendations.'

"5. Assembly conferees characterize the rejected senate amendment
as proposing 'a most intolerable form of class legislation and One which
can in no way be justified or defended before the people.' Senate con-
ferees regret that the assembly conferees should have used language
which seems to place them in antagonism to^both the tax commission
and the governor.

178 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

II.

"1. Senate conferees are in accord with assembly conferees in their
utmost desire to stand 'upon the broad principle of the equal and just
taxation of each individual and every corporation.'

"2. Assembly conferees reiterate the constitutional questions raised
by them in the informal conferences already held by the joint committee.
Senate conferees express their regret that their suggstions that the tax
commissioners and the attorney general be called to the aid of the joint
committee were not acted upon.

"3. Senate conferees have relied upon the reports of the tax com-
mission and upon the fact that the amended bill itself was prepared and
recommended by the tax commissioners as sufficiently assuring that the
bill was not open to constitutional objections. Senate conferees do not
agree to the position taken by assembly conferees that the exemption
of the bonds of a railway company secured upon its property fully taxed
as other property is taxed would invalidate th-e bill, nor do they agree
that the amendment in question would justly give rise to 'a charge
against the legislature of enacting inequitable class legislation.' Never-
theless senate conferees state that they deem it urgently necessary that
any uncertainty surrounding this bill be promptly removed, and that
every doubt that any member of the joint committee on conference may
entertain respecting the validity of the bill be at once dispelled. Senate
conferees therefore agree that the senate shall recede. They ask the
immediate return of the papers to the senate for the purpose of carrying
put this agreement."

The senate having receded from its position, the bill was passed
and became a law, chapter 315, laws of 1903. This law was in
effect the original tax commission bill with the exception of the
provision to exempt from taxes all railroad bonds. The members of
the committees before whom the hearings were held were :

Senate : Senators Whitehead, chairman ; Gaveney, Hatton, O'Neil,
Bird, Johnson, and Stout.

Assembly : Messrs. Smalley, chairman ; Dahl, Whitson, Henry John-
son, Dinsdale, Doolittle, Terrens.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 179

CHAPTER XIX.
Summary of Taxation Legislation.

To the end that the facts with respect to taxation legislation

during the last twelve years may be clearly and easily grasped by

the reader, the following summary of laws enacted has been ar-

. ranged, together with their origin and the support they received in

the upper and lower house.

Chapter 340, laws of 1897; the law creating the first tax com-
mission. Drawn by K. K. Kennan; introduced by Assemblyman
Merriman of the Third Eoek county district. Passed by a con-
servative legislature and signed by a conservative.governor.

Chapter 206 and chapter 323, laws of 1899; creating perma-
nent tax commission. Drawn by committee on assessment and col-
lection of taxes. Senators Whitehead, Riordan, and Thayer. A con-
servative measure passed by a conservative legislature and ap-
proved by a conservative governor.

Chapters 111, 112, 113, and 114, laws of 1899, providing for
the ad valorem taxation of express, sleeping car, freight line and
equipment companies. Known as the "Whitehead laws"; conserva-
tive measures, passed both senate and assembly without a dissent-
ing vote and signed by Gov. Scofield. With a few minor changes
these laws are still in force.

Chapter 345, laws of 1899; the inheritance tax law. Recom-
mended by the first tax commission; drawn by senate committee
on assessment and collection of taxes ; passed both houses with little
opposition. This law was later declared void by the Supreme court
because of a technical error in its construction, but the necessary
correction was made, and the law was re-enacted in 1903. Is now
in force. A conservative law.

Chapter 336, laws of 1899; Judge Orton's insurance taxation
bill. Drawn by Assemblyman P. A. Orton of Lafayette county, a
conservative. Passed both houses by good majorities and received
the approval of Gov. Scofield. This was during the last conserva-
tive administration.

Chapter 379, laws of 1901, provided additional penalties and
punishments for violations of the assessment laws by assessing
officers and property owners and for neglect of duty by assessing
officers. This and the two following statutes were drawn by the
tax commission and were passed with lit;le opposition.

Chapter 330, laws of 1901, provided for the removal of assess-
ing officers for violation of assessment laws or for neglect of official
duty.

Chapter 445, laws of 1901, created the office of county super-
visor of assessments. There was no controversy over this law, as it
was passed without substantial opposition.

180 Political REroEM in Wisconsiw.

Chapter 237, laws of 1901, enlarged the duties and powers of
the tax commission by making that body a state board of assess-
ment to assess the general property of the state for the levy of
state taxes. This bill was introduced by the committee on assess-
ment and collection of taxes in the senate, a conservative commit-
tee, and passed both houses without opposition.

Chapter 35^ laws of 1903, and chapter 477, laws of 1905, made
some changes in the method of assessing and collecting the taxes
of express, sleeping car, freight line and equipment companies.
These measures were presented by the senate and assembly commit-
tees on assessment and collection of taxes respectively and they were
passed without a dissenting vote in either house.

Chapter 44, laws of 1903, the inheritance tax law now in force.
This bill. No. 331S, was drawn by the tax commission, introduced
in the senate by the committee on assessment and collection of taxes,
and passed that house by a unanimous vote. When it came up
for passage in the assembly the vote was 76 to 18, and the bill
passed and became a law. It was subsequently amended without
opposition during the same session in order to correct errors that
had crept in.

Chapter 316, laws of 1903, and 523, laws of 1905, amendatory
to chapter 445, laws of 1901, creating the office of county super-
visor of assessments, passed both houses without opposition. These
laws were all drawn by the tax commission.

Chapter 315, laws of 1903, is the ad valorem railway taxation
law. The original bill was drawn by the tax commission and was
introduced in the senate without change by the committee on
assessment and collection of taxes. A mutilated bill was introduced
in the assembly committee of that house. This bill did not re-
ceive the indorsement of the tax commission, but it represented
the views of Gov. La Follette. It was railroaded through the
assembly in less than a week and was "put up to the senate," the
conservative body. A deadlock resulted, which was finally settled
by compromise by a conference committee, the assembly consenting
to accept all senate amendments but one- — the exemption of rail-
road bonds from taxation. With that exception the statute as it was
finally enacted was the work of the tax commission.

Chapter 216, laws of 1905, amended the above law in sgme
respects as the experience of the commission suggested. This
amendment was drawn by the tax commission. It was introduced
in the assembly by Henry Johnson "by request," and passed both
houses without the formality of a roll call, there being no oppo-
sition.

Chapter 359, laws of 1905, authorizing the commission to re-
view assessments made by county boards, prepared by the tax com-
mission and introduced in the assembly by the committee on assess-
ment and collection of taxes, passed that body by a vote of 72 for

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 181

and 2 against, those voting no being Assemblyman Frank Johnson
of Walworth and John Scott of Columbia county. The vote in the
senate was unanimous for the bill.

Chapter 493, laws of 1905, for the assessment and taxation of
street railway companies by the tax commission, was prepared by
the commission and introduced in the assembly by the committee
on assessment and collection of taxes. It passed both houses with-
out opposition, the vote on roll call being unanimous in both in-
stances. In the assembly 74 votes were cast for the bill and 31
in the senate. There was a deadlock on this bill for a time, the
assembly refusing to concur in an amendment made by the senate.
The matter was referred to a conference committee of the two
houses, consisting of Senators George B. Hudnall, W. H. Hatton,
and A. W, Sanborn, and Assemblymen A. H. Dahl, Henry John-
son and J. M. Crowley. The assembly conferees finally agreed to
report in favor of receding from their position and the unanimous
vote in favor of the bill as amended by the senate was the result.

Chapter 494, laws of 1905, for the assessment and taxation of
property of telegraph eompanites by the commission. Introduced
in the assembly by the committee on assessment and collection of
taxes and passed that body by a vote of 67 for and 14 against.
Senate committee offered an amendment in the form of, a substi-
tute which was adopted by that body by a unanimous vote. Senate
substitute then went to the assembly, where it was concurred in by
a vote of 68 for and 1 against. Assemblyman Brockhausen was
the one member who voted alone in opposition to the measure.

It will thus be seen that the real constructive work for the im-
provement of the taxation system in this state has been done by the
conservative tax commission aided by the conservative members of
the legislature. So far as taxation legislation is concerned the so-
called "progressives" cut an insignificant figure in the official rec-
ords of the state except in one case — where they attempted to delay
progress by forcing the enactment of a law that could not have been
enforced.

182 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEK XX.
The Work Not Yet Completed.

It is not the purpose of this review to criticise unjustly past
administrations, the tax commission, or the legislature for their
failure to speak the last word in taxation reform. Much has been
accomplished, as already has been shown. There remains much
more that must be done before the citizens will be in a position to
give their unqualified approval to the work of taxation reform and
its results.

Criticism that begins and ends in criticism, and has no purpose
but criticism, degenerates into plain fault finding, and is the office
of the common scold. The publication of the truth about state
affairs for the purpose of enlightening the citizens concerning the
details of their public business is another matter. It is only by
spreading abroad the facts with respect to the history and effect
of the taxation reform and other movements that the people can
arrive at an understanding of th» present situation and provide
for the future.

As has been shown, the real constructive work for taxation re-
form was performed by the conservative element in Wisconsin.
The movement had its birth in the conservative ranks and every
step of a progressive character originated with them, and was car-
ried to a successful conclusion by and through their efforts. They
believed there was no royal road to success in the line of taxation
reform, and for that reason they made progress slowly. Had the
councils of the intemperate advocates of drastic measures been
heeded by the legislature conditions would have been very different
from those that now obtain. We would have had litigation prompt-
ly begun, and carried to a successful conclusion, thereby bringing
about cancellations of tax levies, an impoverished treasury, and in-
creased burdens. As it is, we merely have more money than is
required for the needs of the state if its affairs shall be economically
and judiciously, not parsimoniously, managed.

When Gov. La Follette said, in his message read to the legisla-
ture in 1901, that "The period covered by two biennial sessions of
the legislature would appear to be a generous allowance of time for
a thorough and complete performance of the work contemplated
by the law" creating the tax commission he merely expressed an
opinion that was based on little definite information. The same
opinion prevailed in Minnesota about the same time. A commis-
sion was appointed in that state to revise the taxation laws and it
performed the work assigned to it. When the new code was pre-
sented to the legislature it was rejected and a permanent commis-
sion was appointed to assist in the labors of the legislature to ac-
complish the same end.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 183

When an attempt was made in 1903 to force through & bill that
had for its object but one purpose, an additional "$1,000,000 a
year" collection from the railroads, because, as Gov. La Follette
expressed it, "The people want $1,000,000 a year, because that is
the sum owing," the conservatives resisted and secured the enact-
ment of a law that provided for a legal assessment of railroad
property. They did not get the additional $1,000,000 a year until
1906, but when they did get it they were sustained by the courts
and it is regularly collected each year now. This was better than
to go into court with a law that would not have stood the test.

That much has been accomplished is known by all classes of
citizens. They know that the assessment of property is not quite
such a haphazard, unsystematic, illogical process as formerly, be-
cause the local assessors work under supervision of county super-
visors of assessment and the county supervisors are directed in
their labors by the state tax commission. They know that the cor-
porations pay taxes at the rate charged against other property in
the state. They know that a graduated and progressive inheritance
tax has been incorporated into our system. They know that the
injustice that resulted from the attempt to enforce the old mortgage
taxation law is a thing of the past. If nothing else has been accom-
plished, this is something and this something is worth while.

In summing up the results of the legislative and administra-
tive labors of the last twelve years it is found that there is much to
be done before the taxation system of the state can be said to have
been perfected. The income of the state has been enormously in-
creased, it is true, but no corresponding reduction in state taxes
levied upon and collected from the counties has been achieved.
There is a popular belief that the increase in corporation taxes
has made it unnecessary to levy state taxes, but this is an error.
Taxes are still levied for the support of charitable and penal insti-
tutions and for free high schools, graded schools, common schools,
the university, agricultural college, and normal schools. The in-
crease in corporation taxes and state tax levies in ten year periods
is illustrated by the following statement compiled from official
figures found in the reports of the tax commission for the years

1907 and 1909 :

CORPORATION TAXES.

1889 $1,060,560.05

1899 1,711,387.60

1908 3,992,530.07

STATE TAX LEVIES.

1889 $1,207,796.97

1899 1,709,198.37

1908 2,950,110.87

In spite of the fact that the corporation payments to the state
-have jumped in ten years from $1,711,387.60 to $3,992,530.07, an
increase of $?,?81,ll?-47j the state tax levies also have iocreased

184 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

$1,240,912.50, a total increase in these two items alone of
$3,522,054.97. This is in addition to other increases of revenue
which have more than doubled in the ten years from 1889 to 1908,
inclusive. The total increase in revenues in 1908 over 1899 was
$4,229,666.31, or 103.91 per cent. The increase in disbursements
during the same period, according to the tax commission's tables,
amounted to 99.85 per cent. The percentage of increase in revenues
from all sources except taxes for the decade was 126.58; the per-
centage of increase of taxes under the general property tax laws
was 72.60.

When, in 1899, Gov. Scofield warned the people of the state
in a public address that there was danger of collectiiig more money
than was actually needed by the state, he had in view just such a
contingency as is now presented. The state has been liberal in its
expenditures, the amount increasing from year to year, and the bal-
ances in the treasury also have increased. During the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1908, the disbursements for all purposes, according
to the reports, amounted to $7,762,771.49, and there was a balance
in the treasury at the end of the term of $1,546,509.90.

For the two years ending September 30, 1900, the last term of
Gov. Scofield, the disbursements of the state for all purposes
amounted to $7,883,674.89 ; the disbursements for the biennial term
ending June 30, 1908, were $14,229,037.78.

It goes without saying that the expenses of a great state like
Wisconsin will increase from year to year as the population grows
and the cost of maintaining public institutions multiplies. The state
must pay the cost of administering its laws; it must maintain its
courts ; it must care for and educate its defectives ; it must maintain
its schools and colleges, and its university ; it must confine its con-
firmed criminals and at least attempt to reform its wayward young
people and first offenders. And it must pay for all these things.

But the population of the state has not doubled in ten years.
All the legitimate demands of the time were reasonably provided
for ten years ago, and it requires a stretch of the imagination to
believe that the genuine demands upon the state's revenues have
increased approximately 100 per cent in that time.

One of the principal arguments in favor of reforming the taxa-
tion system was that thereby taxes would be equalized. This did
not mean that the taxes of corporations and citizens who were not
paying their just proportion shojild be raised and those who were
paying more than their fair share' should be maintained at their
original rate. In the public mind it meant that there should be a
leveling process, a raising in one place and a corresponding lower-
ing in another until a fair equalization of the burdens of govern-
ment should be reached. It was believed this result could be ap-
proximated.

To the end that the reader may understand in what departments
of the state government the increases in expenditures have occurred

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 186

the following summary of disbursements has been compiled from
the ofBcial reports of the tax commission for the years 1907 and

1909, three years, 1889, 1899, and 1908, being selected to illustrate
the abnormal increase of the last decade:

GENERAL FUND DISBURSEMENTS.

1889 1899 1908

Executive and administrative..? 70,264.73 $ 154,932.56 $ 171,805.15

Judiciary 88,758.71 122,028.94 224,307.87

Legislative 169,139.00 200,597.01 113,774.37

Boards, commissions, etc 137,708.94 264,870.53 793,703.86

Permanent expenses 766,427.82 1,427,653.91 2,174,618.72

Educational disbursements ... 84,941.14 98,387.96 932,034.25

Miscellaneous 209,748.16 143,953.36 83,652.58

Oapitol building commission 406,701.34

Total $1,535,988.50 $2,412,424.27 $4,900,597.64

DISBURSEMENTS EDUCATIONAL FUNDS.

University of Wisconsin $ 133,833.70 $ 390,133.78 $ 895,195.18

Common schools 781,344.53 778,689.25 1,575,426.08

Normal schools 108,548.77 287,579.82 360,230.67

Agricultural college 14,512.26 15,512.84 13,064.52

Total .$1,038,289.26 $1,471,915.19 $2,843,916.45

Disbursements fire marshal's fund 18,257.40

Total all disbursements $2,574,227.76 $8,884,839.46 $7,762,771.49

186 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTER XXI.

An Enormous Increase in Cost of Government.

In his first message to the legislature in 1901 Gov. La Follette
inserted a table of receipts and disbursements of the state govern-
ment from 1889 to 1898, inclusive; As the figures found in his
table do not agree with those printed in the commission's report
for the same years the conclusion is natural that they are only ap-
proximately correct, but they will answer the purpose. The gov-
ernor estimated that the increase in expenses for the ten year period
had been about 50 per cent, and he was alarmed. He said, after
referring to the table :

"The above table of aggregate receipts and disbursements for a
period of years, I believe you will find of value. It shows a steady and
rapid increase in the cost of state government. While there is abun-
dant evidence of expanding usefulness and of unquestioned public bene-
fits derived from most of the new expenditures incurred by the state, an
advance of almost 50 per cent in the cost of state government within a
period of ten years is entitled to high rank among the facts worthy of
grave consideration in all departments of government."

The actual increase in state expenses shown by his figures for
the period mentioned was about 44 per cent. The increase for the
ten years from 1899 to 1908 was 99.85 per cent. If Gov. La Toi-
lette saw reason for grave consideration in the former, there is
more reason why the people of the state in general and the depart-
ments of government in particular should regard the latter as of
prime importance.

A large part of the increase in revenues during the last decade
has come from corporation taxes, but, in the last analysis, the con-
clusion is inevitable that the masses of the people of the state pay
those taxes as well as the direct levies upon their property. The
railroads, for instance, have but one source of revenue. They col-
lect their incomes from the public in the form of passenger fares
and freight charges. As they are permitted by law to charge
enough for their services to pay all expenses, inclusive of taxes,
and leave a balance of profit to be used in paying dividends, the
taxes paid to the state are passed along to their patrons. In this
way the people of the state in which the roads do business pay the
taxes of the road as well as the direct taxes levied upon their prop-
erty by the state, counties, municipalities, towns, and school dis-
tricts.

It has been argued by economists that all taxes are finally
"passed" to the consumer, and this is literally true with respect to
eorporatibn taxes. It is not entirely true in all cases, however. The
owner of city property who secures his income from rents can pass
his taxes to the renter at times. But there are cases where com-
petition with other landlords makes it impossible for him to do so.

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 187

A vacant house or flat brings in no income and it is frequently im-
possible for owners of urban property to charge enough rent to
reimburse them for taxes, repairs, insurance, and interest. With
quasi-public corporations that pay large sums to the state in the
form of taxes this is not the case. They can and do pass the tax
charges to their customers.

For this reason it is plain that the people who pay the taxes in
the end should scan closely the account of money collected and
expended by the state administration. It is not the intention here
to counsel the adoption of a niggardly, parsimonious policy, one
that would hamper the administrative officers in the discharge of
their duties, but a wise economy need not spell parsimony; a care-
ful husbanding of the resources of the state does not necessarily
mean the cutting off of any useful expense that is of "unquestioned
public benefit."

The published reports of state receipts and disbursements do
not convey to the mind of the average reader a clear idea of where
and how the state's money is expended. For this reason the fol-
lowing tables have been prepared, the items of expense being classi-
fied or grouped so that a glance will show in what departments of
the state's activities the largest amounts have been expended and
the greatest increases have occurred. The first table shows the dis-
bursements of the executive and adniinistrative, judicial and legis-
lative departments for the three years selected, 1889, 1899, and
1908 :

, "EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS.

1889 1899 1908

Executive department $ 9,325.00 $ 17,363.21 $ 13,738.47

State departmertt 27,752.50 42,397.45 44,177.83

Treasury department 16,365.00 19,897.13 19,744.93

Attorney general's department.. 5,092.00 12,098.84 20,813.94
Superintendent public ' instruction

department 9,398.03 24,554.61 43,066.94

Insurance commissionerls dep. . . 4,638.90 20,408.49 30,263.04

Railroad commissioner's dep.... 6,693.30 18,212.83

Total $79,264.73 $ 154,932.56 $ 171,805.15

JUDICIARY.

Supreme court $32,304.00 $ 38,371.93 $ 59,775.26

Circuit Court 51,890.32 76,296.87 153,001.97

State law library 4,564.39 7,360.14 11,530.14

Total $ 88,758.71 $ 122,028.94- $ 224,307.37

188 Political Reform in Wisconsih.

LEGISLATIVE.

1889-'90. 1899-'0O. 1907-'08.

1889 $169,139.00

1890 1,029.10

Biennial period $170,168.10 $ $

1899 $200,597.01

1900 6,256.38

Biennial period 206,853.39

1907 $165,590.95

1908 113,774.37

Biennial period 279,365.32

BOARDS, BUREAUS, COMMISSIONS, ETC.

1889. 1899. 1908.
Superintendent public property

and labor $43,806.51 $ 65,273.82 $ 144,506.02

State Historical society 9,860.00 14,181.49 38,169.04

Bureau labor statistics 9,145.20 16,955.61 41,055.51

State land department 14,976.47 27,497.20 10,064.55

Dairy and food commission 3,490.81 12,984.80 42,290.37

State veterinarian 3,906.68 5,825.60 65,531.57

Oil inspection 147.12

Land protection 5,065.70 4,397.17

Pension agent 1,657.91

Game and fish wardens 5,898.02 13,095.45 5,073.51

Fish culture 14,000.00 26,288.61 57,051.55

State board of supervision 13,116.39

State board charities and reform 8,139.46

State board of control 23,744.40 24,865.74

State board of health 4,705.79 5,277.73 15,643.49

State tax commission 5,065.83 51,470.70

State bank examiner 10,929.33

State banking department 21,672.30

State treasury agent 2,360.93 4,716.12

Board of arbitration 920.20 853.54

Free library commission 6,189.91 35,287.52

Board of bar examiners 1,524.59 1,429.66

Board of immigration 2,582.62 6,324.67

State railroad commission 65,683.51

Civil service commission 11,426.85

Forest wardens 376.01 ^

Board of forestry 10,889.95

Geological and natural history

survey 9,386.17 25,636.60

Grain and warehouse commis-
sion 3,500.00

Board of agriculture 80,837.96

Inspection of apiaries 577.36

Commissioners of public print'g 225.07

Interstate park commission 12,304.71

State board medical examiners 39.62

State park board 700.00

Sundry temporary commissions 10,013.06 9,558.61

Waterways commission 5,957.74

State board canvassers 213.40

Total $137,708.94 $ 264,870.53 $ 793,703.86

Taxation Retorm in Wisconsin. 189

PERMANENT EXPENSES.

1889. 1899. 1908.

Charitable and penal institut'ns. $467,328.46 3 711,572.11 $1,284,613.30

Maintaining insane in counties. 199,866.26 390,769.87 434,715.30

Acute and chronic insane 62,205.10

Wisconsin National guard 63,692.71 143,479.43 148,643.74

Bounty on wild animals 7,985.00 10,033.00 24,624.00

Agricultural Experiment ass'n 2,763.08

Agricultural and industrial so-
cieties 12,226.60 25,881.44 17,777.24

County agricultural societies... 15,328.79 50,265.34 85,740.48

Wisconein Veterans' home 95,652.72 113,536.48

Total $766,427.82 $1,427,653.91 $2,174,618.72

MISCELLANEOUS.

Contractors state eapitol $ 26,000.00 $ $

Sundries.. 9,227.14

Printing, publishing, advertising 81,089.65

Compiling war records 17,400.96

Stationery, postage, paper 15,098.68 13,256.50

Fuel and light 16,133.41 6,619.26

Incidental expenses 17,726.18 16,901.65

Miscellaneous 27,072.14 6,604.15 62,529.00

Draftsmen 1,106.45

Statement real estate sales 1,385.50 " 1,459.53

Expert accountants 1,060.39

State historical library building

fund 60,000.00

Sanborn & Berryman's statutes 22,554.00

Barron county fire sufferers 10,000.00

Repairs, Ch. 15, laws of 1899 1,992.83

Sundry refunds 2,472.63

Reporting criminal statistics 31.20

Prevention San Jose scale 857.24

Memorial hall 146.18

Governor's contingent fund 2,000.00

Claims against United States 3,879.54

Tax title lands purchased 751.32

Compiling and publishing town

laws 3,710.97

Public documents 1,802.96

Disbarment proceedings 1,782.13

Reviewing assessments 4,702.51

Total $209,748.16 $ 143,953.36 $ 83,652.58

190 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

GENERAL FUND EDUCATIONAL APPROPRIATIONS.

Common schools $ $ $ 308,109.36

University 56,715.30 27,797.25 49,952.82

Normal schools 1,922.54 2,704.73 259,337.41

Graded schools 71,500.00

Free high schools 26,303.30 48,163.11 122,481.01

Deaf mute Instruction in cities 19,222;87 39,480.85

County training schools for

teachers 35,433.98

County schools of agrie. and do-
mestic science 8,000.00

Manual training in high schools 500.00 5,000.00

Mining trade school 21,701.97

Academy science, arts and letters 2,036.85

Teachers' county institutes 9,000.00

Total $ 84,941.14 $ 98,387.96 $ 932,034.25

TAXES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND TRUST
FUND INCOME.

Common schools $781,344.53 $ 778,689.25 $1,575,426.08

University 133,833.70 390,133.78 895,195.18

Normal schools 108,548.77 287,579.82 360,230.67

Agricultural college 14,512.26 15,512.34 13,064.52

Total $1,038,239.26 $1,471,915.19 $2,843,916.45

Total disbursements educational

purposes $1,123,180.40 $1,570,303.15 $3,775,950.70

TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS EDUCATIONAL FUNDS CLASSIFIED.

Common schools $781,344.53 $ 778,689.25 $1,883,535.44

University 190,549.00 417,931.03 945,148.00

Normal schools 110,471.31 290,284.55 619,568.08

Miscellaneous 26,303.30 67,885.98 314,634.66

Agricultural college 14,512.26 15,512.34 13,064.52

Total $1,123,180.40 $1,570,303.15 $3,775,950.70

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 191

CHAPTER XXII.

Where Expenses Have Inceeased.

The most considerable increase in the cost of government is
shown by the tables to have been in the maintenance of the educa-
tional institutions, which cost $1,570,303.15 in 1899 and $3,775,-
950.70 in 1908, an increase of $2,205,647.55. The state paid
$1,104,846.19 more for the maintenance of its common schools in
1908 than it did in 1899, This amount was merely collected from
the taxpayers in the form of a state school tax and then returned
to the counties on the basis of the school census. The counties
were required to raise an equal amount in the form of a county
school tax.

This method of doing business is not approved by the best au-
thorities, either among the schoolmen or economists. In comment-
ing on this subject in its report of 1903 the tax commission said
(page 39) :

"The effect of the mill tax is to make the wealthy counties with a
relatively smaller school population contribute to the counties having less
material wealth but rich in the number of school children. The law has
been in force since 1885, and while the tax was limited by undervaluation
of assessing officers to $600,000 or thereabouts without material change
from year to year, its burdens were not felt. It is believed, however,
that the amount of this tax under the full value assessment is larger
than required by the best interests of the common schools, and tha't it
tends to destroy that healthy local interest which follows where the com-
munity itself is held at least in part responsible for the maintenance of
the school. During the last year in many country districts no district
tax was levied, the school being maintained entirely by the school fund
apportionment, including the mill tax and the corresponding tax levied
by the county board upon the towns. In some districts the moneys thus
collected left a surplus in the district treasury. Such a condition has a
tendency to breed a degree of extravagance which should be discoun-
tenanced in public affairs."

The legislature attempted to correct this manifest mistake of
policy by fixing the rate of the school appropriation at seven-tenths
of a mill. Of this amount $200,000 was taken from the general fund
and the balance was raised by a tax upon all property except that
paying a license fee (chapter 313, laws of 1903). In its report
for 1907 (pages 79 and 80) the tax commission thus commented
on the situation at that time :

"With a constantly increasing state assessment the fund thus pro-
vided becomes larger each year. Now that the state assessment has
reached $2,124,800,000 this 7-10 mill tax, together with the regular
income of the school fund, amounts to about $1,600,000."
**********

"The tax and its distribution are illogical, wasteful and demoralizing
in any district where the amounts recaived from the state and from the
corresponding levy by the county board create a larger fund than the
needs of the school properly and liberally managed require."

192 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

It may be said that, so long as the money is collected as a gen-
eral property tax and is subsequently returned to local officers it is
merely taken from one pocket and put into another, but this is not
strictly true. The state and county school taxes are paid back to
the school districts, and the officers of the districts look upon the
amounts as a species of contribution. They do not collect and ex-
pend the tax directly. In some cases they receive more than they
pay in the form of state and county school taxes. In any event the
payment of the tax is made in a roundabout way, and whether
they receive more or less than they pay, it is too much like getting
something for nothing — picking money out of the air.

Two distinct evils grow out of the practice. One is that ten-
dency toward extravagance mentioned by the tax commission; the
other is a tendency in the opposite direction where the money re-
ceived falls short of the amount required to run the school as it
should be run. If, by cutting the teacher's salary and practicing
other unwise economies, the expenses of the district can be kept
within the limit of the sum received from the state and county, the
school board is too apt to recommend the "passing" of the district
school tax and the annual meeting will in a majority of cases follow
the suggestion. In this way the too liberal policy of the state
operates to the disadvantage gi the school.

Another material increase in disbursements is found in the
item of boards, bureaus, and commissions. In 1899 the state ex-
pended $264,870.53 for the support of these bodies ; in 1908 the
cost to the state for the same service was $793,703.86, an increase
of $538,833.33. As the items of which this substantial sum is
made up' are given in the table in detail comment is unnecessary,
but one may be allowed to suggest that an increase of more than
$100,000 in the expenses of the superintendent of public property
in ten years is a matter worthy of careful consideration. The larg-
est single item of expense in this department of the state's busi-
ness is in labor about the capitol and grounds.

The expense incidental to maintaining the charitable and jit^nal
institutions has increased as a natural consequence of the increase
in the number of inmates of the several institutions. The advance
in the price of many articles that enter into the cost of living has
had some influence on the expenses of these institutions during the
last decade. On the other hand^ the larger average population of
the institutions has operated in most cases to reduce the per capita
cost of maintenance. According to the report of the board of
control for the year of 1907, the latest figures available on this '
subject, the average population and per capita cost per week of
maintenance at the beginning and end of the decade from 1897 to
1906 was as follows (Wis. Pub. Documents, 1905-1906, vol. 3,
pages 40 and 41 of report of board of control) :

Taxation Reform in Wisconsin. 193

Average Population. Per Capita Cost.

State hospital for insane —

1897 , 405 $5.38

1906 459 4.52

Northern hospital for insane —

1897 539 4.75

1906 032 3.85

School for deaf—

1897 136 6.48

1906 187 5.01

School for blind —

1897 80 7.94

1906 93 7.01

Industrial school for bovs —

1897 346 ' 3.54

1906 312 '3.95

State prison —

1897 601 ■ 2.89

1906 641 3.41

State public school- -

1897 262 3.51

1906 156 4.56

Home for feeble minded —

1897 42 7.08

1906 681 3.00

State reformatory, Green Bay —

1901 128 5.33

1906 290 2.40

As shown by the above figures, which are official, the net in-
crease in the average population of the above institutions during
the decade under consideration was 919. The net increase in the
cost of maintaining the institutions during the same decade was
$335,180.39. The net increase in the cost of the same institutions
for the year 1908 over 1906 was $341,259.51, or $6,079.22 more than
for the ten previous years.

It is understood that in computing the cost per capita per week
of maintaining inmates in the state institutions the board has not
included the cost of administration at the several institutions, the
"maintenance expenses" alone being figured. For instance, the
board reports an average population of 681 at the home for the
feeble minded, maintained at a weekly per capita cost of $3. For
fifty-two weeks of that year this would make a total cost of main-
tenance of $106,236. In the statement for the year 1906 printed
in the tax commission's report for 1907, page 245, the cost of that
institution to the taxpayers of the state is given as $151,233.86,
which would mean a balance for administration and improvements
above the per capita cost of maintaining inmates of $44,997.86.

Another matter, small in itself, yet showing the tendency of
the state's disbursements to steadily increase, is the item of "bounty
on wild animals." Wisconsin has done much during the last
twenty years to reduce the extent of its wild areas. Eailroads have
been built through the forests'; wagon roads have been opened from

194 Political Reform iisr Wisconsin.

the railroad stations in all directions and settlers have multiplied
until there are few counties in the northern half of the state that
can be said to be comfortable abiding places for the kind of wild
animals on which the state pays a bounty. There are men who
hate lived in northern Wisconsin for more than a quarter of a
century and who have spent considerable time in the woods who
have never seen or heard a wolf, a wild cat, or any other obnoxious
wild animal, and yet the amount of money paid as bounty on
wild animals increased from $7,985 in 1889 to $24,624 in 1908.
Why?

It may be explained here that the hunting license money does
not appear in the accounts herewith printed for the reason that it
is a special fund. The account is kept in a separate book in the
offices of the secretary of state and state treasurer, but in making
up the reports from which the figures in this review are taken it
was not thought necessary to give an accounting of this fund.

Taxation Refoem in Wisconsin. 195

CHAPTEK XXIII.
Uncalled for Extravagance.

George Curtis, Jr., a member of the tax commission and the
one member who has served continuously since the organization
of the temporary commission in 1897, delivered an address before
the Wisconsin Municipal league on Sept. 3, 1908, which address
is printed in the official report of the tax commission for the year
1909, as appendix C, pages 149 to 170. This address is a valuable
contribution to the literature on the subject of taxation and it
should be widely read. For the purposes of this review, however,
references will only be made to the chapter on "Municipal Ex-
travagance." Mr. Curtis quotes from Prof. Seligman of Columbia
university, the eminent economist, as follows : '

"The growth of democracy has brought with it new conceptions as to
the duty and function of government. Expenditures which would have
appalled our fathers seem to us reasonable and necessary. To hope to
remove the problem of ta.vation by cutting down expenditures is vain.
Economy we must, indeed, have, but not parsimony. The ideal of ex-
penditure is not to spend little, but to spend well. Savages spend little
or nothing, but are none the less savages. Democracy must spend much
— will spend even more — but it should spend intelligently. With the
growth of civilization, expenditures must increase."

In commenting on this paragraph Commissioner Curtis says:

"Prof. Seligman should not be understood as implying that a com-
munity is justified in spending all that it can 'spend intelligently,' or all
that it can 'spend well,' or that the only requisites in public expenditures
are to avoid paying too high a price for the things purchased, and stop
the leak from grafting and other criminality. He doubtless believes, as
most of us believe, that in addition to these observances there must be
constantly exercised a sound and statesmanlilie judgment as to what
are, and what are not virtual necessities, from the viewpoint of public
good, having reference always to the condition or potentiality of the
purse from which the funds must be drawn — much the same sort of
judgment that is essential to success in the conduct of Important com-
mercial and industrial enterprises ; and moreover that this judgment
must be exercised with a couarge which will not flinch or quail before
specious persuasion or popular clamor. This is easy to point out and to
talk about, but in the light of past experience it seems very hard to
secure."

The taxes collected in Wisconsin in the year 1908 for state,
county, municipal, township, and school' purposes, amounted in the
aggregate to approximately $36,000,000. Every dollar of this
money came in one form or another from the pockets of the people
of the state. The corporation taxes, the peddlers' license money,
the collections from saloon keepers in the form of licenses, were
all paid by the people no less than the direct taxes for the support
of the schools and for building roads and bridges.

Where there is collected from the people one dollar more than
is needed for the economical administration of the laws and the

196 Political Kefobm in Wisconsin.

support of the state institutions injustice is inevitable. The state
has no more right to take from its citizens money that is not actually
needed for its purposes than- a corporation or a private business
enterprise has to practice extortion because it finds itself in a posi-
tion to demand and enforce the payment of an unjust claim. The
measure of the state's right to levy and collect taxes is the measure
of its actual needs. This fact is fundamental.

Municipal luxury, the erection of public buildings for show
purposes mainly, albeit an excuse may be framed that the buildings
are needed for office purposes, is municipal extravagance. Luxuri-
ous display in municipalities and states had its birth in ancient
times when warlike peoples brought back from their predatory ex-
cursions the spoils of their enemies and erected palaces, temples,
public baths, and laid out magnificent gardens to proclaim the
glory of their arms and to perpetuate their fame. Not only did the
loot secured by conquest enter into the construction of the mag-
nificent cities of olden times, but the sweat and blood of slaves
cemented the bricks of which the walls were built. Ninevah, Baby-
lon, Antioch, Eome, all grew to greatness through rapine, murder,
extortion, injustice;. all flourished for a time in luxury; all suc-
cumbed to stronger peoples in the end.

While it is true that a democracy must spend much, there is no
need for a modern state or municipality to attempt to emulate even
in a weak and puny way the luxury of the ancients. The demands
of public health and convenience require the initial expenditure of
large sums of money for the purposes of supplying pure water, a
perfect drainage system, for cleaning the streets and for the disposal
of garbage and refuse. The demands of the future require that
the children of this generation shall be educated and fitted to assume
the responsibilities of citizenship. The defectives and criminal
classes must be cared for ; courts must be provided to interpret and
executive and administrative ofiicers to enforce the laws. But
when this is accomplished the purposes of a democratic govern-
ment are served.

The fact should be kept in mind always that the people pay
the bills and it is the people's purse, not the public treasury, that
suffers when an unnecessary expense is incurred. State pride and
municipal pride are commendable and worthy of encouragement,
but they should never be permitted to serve as an excuse for an
unnecessary tax levy. The hanging gardens of Babylon were the
pride of the Babylonian kings and nobles, but the people who paid
the bills had no occasion to contemplate them with pleasure or
satisfaction.

PART THREE.

EAILWAY REGULATIOlf

CHAPTEE I.

The Eaely Period of Agitation".

The lawful right of the state to regulate common carriers, even
to the point of jBixing rates that may be charged for services ren-
dered either in carrying passengers or freight, was early established
in Wisconsin. There never has been a dispute on this point sin-ce
the litigation resulting from the enactment of the historic "Potter
law" in 1874 was decided in favor of that principle. (Attorney
General vs. E. E. Comp., 35 Wis., 435.) The opinion of the Wis-
consin Supreme Court in this case was written by the late Chief
Justice Eyan, and it was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the
United States.

At the same time, the right of the common carriers to exact
from their patrons a rate of freight and passenger charges that will
enable them to do business at a profit was also early established. In
1870 Chief Justice Dixon laid down this principle in an opinion'
deciding the case of Whiting vs. Sheboygan E. E., in which he said :
"The power of the legislature to regulate the tolls and charges of
such companies is in itself a limited one ; if not in a constitutional
sense, certainly in the sense of morality and justice. If there be
not an express, there is certainly an implied, obligation and prom-
ise, on the part of the state, never to reduce the tolls and charges
below a standard which will be reasonable, or which will afford a
fair and adequate remuneration and return upon the amount of
capital actually invested."

These two principles, which, are fundamental, being established,
the only opening for controversy with respect to the relations that
should exist between the state and the common carriers has been
one of policy. The question has been, how far ought the state to
go in its eiforts to regulate and supervise the business of the railroad
corporations ?

It is not the intention here to go into details concerning the
arguments used by the supporters of the two sides of the proposi-
tion to regulate railroad rates. It is sufficient to say that the advo-

197

198 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

cates of radical legislation were manifestly firm believers in the
total depravity of all corporations, while the conservatives were
afraid that a political commission, were it to attempt to- fix rates in
advance, would so bimgle its work that disaster would result to the
interests of the carriers and patrons alike. The former class argued
that the only safe way of avoiding extortion and unjust exactions
in the form of freight and passenger rates was to place the rate
making power in the hands of a commission made up of state offi-
cers ; the latter maintained that the railroad traffic men were better
equipped to fix rates, and the only office that could safely be en-
trusted to a commission was that of hearing complaints and review-
ing rates. The radicals contended that it was for the interest of
the common carriers to charge high rates, thereby increasing their
profits ; the conservatives replied that the interests of the railroad
corporations were identical with those of their patrons, and that
they would fix rates that would encourage business, thereby in-
creasing their tonnage. All of these arguments were elaborated to
the degree of exhaustion duriag the last period of agitation which
extended from 1895 to 1902 in a preliminary skirmish, and from
1902 to 1905 in a pitched battle.

The two distinct, well defined periods of agitation against the
railroad corporations in this state were separated by fully fifteen
years of comparative quiet. The first period culminated in the
enactment of the "Potter law," chapter 273, laws of 1874, and
closed with the repeal of that statute two years later. The second
period began with the election of A. E. Hall to the assembly in 1891,
followed by the adoption, in 1902, by the then governor, E. M.
La Pollette, of the railroad regulation proposition fathered by A.
E. H^U and the injection into that proposition of several radical
features borrowed from Iowa and Texas. It ended in the passage
of a modified, rationalized railroad commission bill in 1905.

The first period was characterized by a wave of popular preju-
dice against the railroad companies that swept over the state and
carried everything before it. The election in 1873 was on the face
of "it a democratic victory. As a. matter of fact it was the triumph
of an element that had nothing in common with the regular, Jeffer-
sonian democracy of that time. The men who were in. the saddle
in 1874 in this state would have b.een called "populists" a dozen
years later. Some of them happened to hold prominent positions
in the democratic party and they ingratiated themselves into the
ranks of the grangers and captured that organization, making of it
an adjunct to the democratic party. The victory at the polls was
a populist victory, in fact, although the populist party had not
yet been born.

During the second period the prejudice against the railroads was
not so marked among the people of the state, notwithstanding the

Railway Reguiation. 199

stremaoTis efforts on the part of Gov. La Follette and his personal
followers to light anew the. fires of popular hate and rancor. There
was no widespread demand on the part of the people at that time
for radical legislation aimed at the railway corporations, and it was
impossible in 1903 and 1905 to carry the legislature off its feet and
repeat the legislative blunder of 1874.

One of the noteworthy incidents of the first period of anti-
railroad agitation was a report prepared by a legislative committee
in 1874 and printed in the Assembly Journal of that session. The
committee was composed of members of both houses. Senators P. W.
von Cotzhausen and A. E. Bleekman for the senate and Messrs.
H. W. Sawyer, Michael Johnson, and D. L. Bancroft, for the as-
sembly, and it was known as the "Joint committee on tariffs and
taxation." It was charged with the duty of investigating both the
subject of railway rates and taxation — a somewhat comprehensive
task for a legislative committee — ^with instructions to report by
bill, the intention being to settle the railway rate controversy and
perfect the general taxation system at the same time.

The committee did not agree on a unanimous report, as Senator
von Cotzhausen was then, as always, in favor of the ad valorem
taxation of railroad ptoperty and he could find few supporters at
the time for his proposition to return to that system. But an agree-
ment was reached on the subject of railroad rate regulation, the
majority report on that head being written by Senator von Cotz-
hausen and signed by Assemblymen Sawyer (Judge H. W. Sawyer,
of Hartford, Washington county) , Michael Johnson of Dane county,
and Senator Bleekman of Monroe county.

The peculiarity of this report is that it is sound doctrine today,
although it was written during a period of violent anti-railway
agitation and at a time when the railroad business in this state
had barely begun to develop. It was written and signed by demo-
crats of the old school and received the indorsement of certain
other democrats of the same kind who happened to be members
of the legislature in that so called "granger year." Although this
report was not accepted as good law and sound doctrine at that
time, thirty years later the principles laid down in that public docu-
ment were indorsed by a Wisconsin legislature. The legislature of
1874 was determined to take over the rate making power absolutely,
although its committee could see no virtue in the attempt to "rem-
edy the evil by legally fixed, inflexible rules." The legislature of
1905 found a way to secure fair dealing and justice between shipper
and carrier without attempting to establish a system of rates of
an arbitrary character based solely upon weight, bulk, and distance
hauled.

It should be remembered that in 1874 the traffic business had
not been reduced to an exact science, nor has that end been attained

200 Political Refoem in Wisconsin.

at this late day after thirty-five years' additional experience. The
work is a complicated one, requiring the constant service of ap-
proximately 10,000 trained traffic officers to do the business for the
300 railroad organizations in this country. The best of these men
acknowledge freely that the ideal system of freight rates, at the
same time mathematically, ethically, and economically correct and
unimpeachable, has yet to be framed. Where one or two of these
requirements are met, there is default in the other. How much
less likely, then, is a legislative committee to solve this complicated
problem. The committee of 1874 did not feel competent to under-
take the task. They were content to advise that steps be taken to
prevent the exaction of rates and tolls that were demonstrably ex-
orbitant and excessive. In view of the situation at the time the
following excerpts from the report in question (Assembly Journal,
1874, page 433) is of interest:

"The legislature has full power and control over railroad companies
in this state. Under section 1, article XI of our constitution, any general
law or special act granting corporate powers may be altered or repealed
at pleasure.

"All corporations, created or operating under grant from this state,
are conclusively presumed to have accepted their charters and corporate
franchises in view of this constitutional reservation. No plea of charter
or contract rights with us can reasonably arise — as in Illinois and other
states where a constitutional safeguard like ours (until of late) does
not exist.

"The people of this commonwealth are therefore not at the mercy of
the railroads — and consequently, with us there is no cause for alarm !

"It follows from the above that the power of the state over these
corporations even extends to financial matters, and your committee enter-
tains no doubt that it is within the province of the legislature to regu-
late tariffs — yea, that it is its duty to do so whenever the rates and tolls
exacted are exorbitant and oppressive.

"The few weeljs allowed your committee — while at the same time
overburdened with other legislative duties — have not enabled them to
give this subject of tariff as thorough an investigation as the complicated
nature thereof evidently requires. The most intricate questions con-
stantly arise, which seem almost to make it impossible, by law, to regu-
late these matters without doing injustice to either the one or the other
side. That there is just cause to complain of oppressive rates in a
number of instances no one doubts ; but how to remedy the evil by legally
fixed, inflexible rules, is as yet a mystery. Our sister states have been
experimenting more or less the last years, yet we hardly hear of a per-
ceptible change to the better.

"Then, again, it ought to be borne in mind that rates, though high,
are not necessarily exorbitant. Whether exorbitant, unfair and op-
pressive, depends not upon their height; the true criterion is, whether
the same are in just proportion to the actual and bona fide capital
employed by the carrier In carrying on his business. On this capital —
but not on watered stock — corporations are entitled, first of all, to a fair
and even liberal return."

The committee then reported that it was not prepared to intro-
duce a bill regulating tariffs, and continued :

Railway Regulation. 201

"But we recommend that a board of coairaissioners.be created, con-
sisting of three to be appointed by the governor, *ith the consent and
approval of the senate, whose duty it shall be to examine into the
condition of all railroad, express and telegraph companies in the state,
and their mode and manner of doing business; to collect information
and statistics relating to tariffs and taxation in this and other states;
to inform itself as to all laws regulating transportation and charges by
carriers, and the decisions of the courts thereupon; and which board
of commissioners shall be Intrusted with such power and authority as
in the performance of its various duties, and in furtherance of the ends
and objects of its creation, may be necessary or from time to time be
delegated by the legislature; so that, after full Investigation, the next
or future legislatures may understandingly act and adopt such rules,
regulations and restrictions as, with proper regard to all Interests, the
public welfare may seem to require."

203 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTER II.
The Potter Bill Passed.

The legislature of 1874 provided for the appointWiit of a com-
mission, but it was ijot such a commission as was recommended in
the report of the joint committee. The committee, in fact, intro-
duced a bill in each house, designed to carry into effect the recom-
mendations incorporated in their report. These bills, No. 206S,
and No. 466A, were duplicates. They were introduced by Senator
von Cotzhausen in the upper and Judge Sawyer in the lower' house.
But these bills were sidetracked for the Potter bill.

No one appears to know where the Potter bill came from. E.
L. D. Potter was a state senator from the Twenty-fifth district and
lived at Wautoma, Waushara county. He was a lawyer and had
no technical knowledge of the railroad business. It was freely
stated at the time, and frequently has been reiterated since, that
Senator Potter did not have the information at hand to enable him
to frame a bill like the one he succeeded in having substituted
for the committee bill.

At all events, he had the bill in his possession and he succeeded
in having it substituted for assembly bill No. 466, the one intro-
duced by Judge Sawyer, for the records show that the assembly
bill of that number passed both houses and became a law. The
legislative records at that time were not as carefull;^ kept as they
are now and the task of following a measure through the Journals
of the two houses is an extremely difficult one. The character of
the law, chapter 273, laws of 1874, sufficiently explains the mo-
tives that prompted -its enactment. In his "Historical Eeminis-
cences and Reflections," printed in pamphlet form recently. Senator
von Cotzhausen says, page 32:

"* * * But, under pressure of popular passion, the 'Potter bill,'
which fixed a certain tariff for all classes of commodities and distances,
met with favor in both houses and passed by an overwhelming vote. It
was not discussed in its details by our committee at all, because all of
us were lacking the practical knowledge of dealing with such a compli-
cated subject. Who was the real author of the bill has always remained
a profound secret. It was crowded upon the calendar at a rather late
day of the session. It was named after the senator from the Twenty-
fifth district, who by profession was a lawyer. It emanated, beyond
doubt, from some one quite familiar with matters of transportation, but
the man never came to the surface ; no argument was ever presented
In committee or on the floor in support of its detail enactments ; the bill
passed both houses almost blindly, because.,it aimed at the railroads."

The Potter law was a distance tariff measure, pure and simple.
It fixed the classifications of freight and prescribed maximum
rates that might be charged for transporting freight on a distance
basis. For instance : Class D covered "grain in carload lots" and
the maximum rate for that class was :

Railway Regulation. 203

"* * * not exceeding 6 cents per 100 pounds for the first twenty-
nve miles, and not exceeding 4 cents per 100 pounds for the second
twenty-five miles, and not exceeding 2 cents per 100 pounds for each
additional twenty-five miles or fractional part thereof, unless said frac-
tional part shall be less than thirteen miles. In which case the jate shall
be one (1) cent for said fractional part, unless the whole distance be
over 200 miles, when no greater rate than y^ cent per 100 pounds shall
be received for each twenty-five miles over said first mentioned distance."

The law also provided for the appointment of a commission
made up of three members who were to enforce its provisions. The
railroad companies protested against its enforcement and appealed
to the courts, but tlTe right of the legislature to enact such a law was
sustained both in the Supreme Court of the state and the United
States and the rates fixed by the statute were put into force and
efEect.

The result of this experiment is well known. The business of
the state was demoralized. The flame of passion and prejudice
fanned to a white heat by fanatics and demagogues, began to cool.
The people had asked for a reform and they had been given virtual
ruin. All development was stopped because the railroads discon-
tinued their work of extension. They could not do business under
the conditions prescribed. So far as local roads were concerned,
roads that depended for patronage almost entirely on business
within the state, they faced bankruptcy and one, later known as the
Lake Shore road, was sold by order of the court for failure to pay
interest.

An incident occurred during this time, while the Potter law was
in effect, in fact, which shows how important is an understanding
between the industries of a state and the transportation lines. The
facts relating to this incident may be found in the stenographic re-
port of an offhand address delivered by former Gov. W. D. Hoard
at a meeting of the Wisconsin Dairymen's Association held at Fond
du Lac Feb. 11, 1903, and printed in the annual report of that body
for the year 1903, pages 15 to 31 inclusive.

In his address Mr. Hoard was led into a reminiscent mood by
recalling that one of the earliest meetings of the association was
held iu Fond du Lac, and he then called up from memory some
of the struggles through which the association had passed in its
youth. "Take these thirty-one years," he said. "Why, you can't
think, unless you can remember, what a contrast there is today, with
all this broad and pulsing movement of energy in the state of Wis-
consin, over the situation as it stands now and as it stood when I
- came up here as secretary of this Wisconsin Dairymen's Association
to hold its second meeting, thirty years ago."

Mr. Hoard then went on to tell how the association, at his re-
quest, permitted him to go to Chicago to try to interest railroad
men in the development, of the dairy industry iu this state. He
could see with a prophetic eye to what extent the dairy industry

204 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

could be developed if wayg and means were provided for getting
the product to market. Wisconsin eheesemakers were then paying
a rate of 2 1-3 cents a pound on cheese from Wisconsin to New
York," and the industry was languishing._ He went to Chicago at
his own expense and for two days he wandered from one railroad
office to another without results until he succeeded in getting an
interview with William Chandler, one of the officers of an impor-
tant line. Continuing, he said :

"Well, I felt angry at the way the railroad people didn't and
wouldn't see this thing, and I shot into that man's ofiice and I said, 'Mr.
Chandler, I come here representing 3,000,000 pounds of cheese that
wants a quick and safe and cheap outlet to the east, and I want to know
what you are going to do about it?' He wheeled and looked at me, and
he says, 'Who are you?' I said, 'My name is W. D. Hoard, and I am
secretary of the Wisconsin Dairymen's association, and they sent me
here, and we have about 3,000,000 pounds of cheese in the state, and it
wants to get out of the state. I want to know what you will do about
it' 'Well,' he says, 'we will do most anything you say if you have got
that amount of cheese. What do you want?' I said, 'We pay 2% cents
a pound to get this cheese to New York. We are shipping it in poor cars
and our folks don't know anything — any of us know but little, there is a
vast amount of ignorance in the way, and we want you to come up there.
There isn't one man in a thousand ever saw a refrigerator car. You
have just commenced to use them. I want you to send up a car to
Watertown to that dairy board of trade, and come up yourself and
explain to those cheese people. Then I want you to make a rate of 1
cent a pound from anywhere in Wisconsin to New York.' He straight-
ened back and he said, 'Is there anything else you want?' I said, 'Mr.
Chandler, I can see with the eye of prophecy that if you will do that
thing it will put millions of dollars into your pocket. All that is needed
is to take this obstruction out of the channel, and the cow will take care
of the rest. Let us have a chance to move this cheese out of Wisconsin.'
'Well,' Mr. Chandler says, T will be there.' Well, he sent this car up
to Watertown and Chester Hazen and a number of other men, I got
them all to come down there, and he explained to us what he would do
and how we would stop the car— if one factory had only half a load he
would stop the car. If we would ice the car he would see to the other
operation of it. That was away back in 1875. He made the rate 1 cent
a pound, and, do you know, the thing began to move and move."

Railway Regulation. 205

CHAPTER III.

The Two Systems Compared.

Mr. Hoard's success marked the beginning of the system of
concentration and commodity rates on cheese, butter and other
dairy products, and it illustrates the difference in results when
patrons deal directly with the transportation companies in an in-
telligent manner and when the attempt is made to fix rates by law
and manage transportation companies through political bodies. The
concentration and commodity system in Wisconsin had its birth
in that first refrigerator car sent to Watertown and in the 1 cent
rate to New York, together with the privilege of stopping the car
en route from place to place along the line of road in Wisconsin
to pick up a load.

The outcome of this experiment has been that today Wisconsin
makes more cheese, more butter, and more condensed milk than
any other one state in the union. This last year, 1909, it is esti-
mated that the dairy products of Wisconsin amounted in the ag-
gregate to $68,000,000 in value. The development of the dairy
industry has restored fertility to the worn out farms of 1875.
Farmers in Wisconsin were facing ruin when Mr. Hoard went to
Chicago to secure a 1 cent rate on cheese to New York; they are
now prosperous agriculturists engaged in diversified farming, and
the money in Wisconsin banks is mostly farmers' money. And the
commodity and concentration rates that contributed almost wholly
to this development were the result of negotiation, not statute law.

At the same time,- the development of the industry has operated
to still further reduce rates. Nov. 16, 1909, the rates on cheese'
and butter from Wisconsin points to New York were as follows :

CHEESE.

Less than
Carloads, carloads,
per cwt. per cwt.

Richland Center $ .72 $ .82

Calamine 70 .80

Monroe 69 .75

Kiel 65 .67

Plymouth 60 .62

Milwaukee 50 any quantity.

BUTTER.

Less than
Carloads, carloads,
per cwt. per cwt.

Richland Center $ .92 $1.00

Calamine -91% -99

Monroe • 90 .95%

Kiel 81 -84%

Plymouth ' * 75 .77

Milwaukee 65 any quantity.

206 Political Refoem in Wisconsin.

But that is not all. Wisconsin can now land cheese on the docks
at Liverpool, England, for less than 1 cent a pound. The rate
from Eichland Center, the highest, is about 92 cents per hundred-
weight; from Milwaukee, the lowest, is about 75 cents per hun-
dredweight, or 3-4 of a cent a pound. And all this grew out of the
negotiations between shippers and transportation companies and
the farms of Wisconsin received the benefit.

The results of the first attempt in Wisconsin to regulate trans-
portation companies by arbitrarily fixing their rates by law can be
briefly set forth. In his first message to the legislature in 1896 Gov.
Ludington took occasion to explain what the Potter law had accom-
plished in the way of reform. Gov. Harrison Ludington was a
practical business man and he pictured conditions as he found them.
He had been elected over Gov. Taylor, the reform granger governor,
and he had reason to believe the legislature to which his message
was sent to be read was disposd to hear and heed reason and common
sense. Also, he was faced by a condition, not a theory, as President
Cleveland remarked on a memorable occasion, and the condition
' required that remedial action be taken by the legislature. As a rea-
son for asking that a remedy be applied the governor explained :

"The present condition of the railway interests of the state and the
existing laws affecting that system are earnestly recommended to the
consideration of the legislature. With the exception of the line from
Portage to Stevens Point (a portion of the line to aid which the state
received a large grant), which 'is now in progress of construction, no
railways are being built within the limits of the state. While the central
and eastern portions are well supplied with these facilities, the south-
western and northern portions are almost wholly without them. None
of the companies owning or operating lines within the state have paid
dividends to their stockholders for the last two years. The line from
Milwaukee to Manitowoc and thence to Appleton has recently been sold
under judicial proceedings growing out of a failure to pay interest on
the first mortgage bonds, those citizens and municipal corporations of the
state who have contributed largely to its construction losing their
investment."

After referring to the Potter law and disclaiming any intention
to question the right of the state to regulate railroad corporations
within reasonable and proper limits, the right having been affirmed
by the Supreme Court, Gov. Ludington continued:

"It can not be denied that the existing laws, passed in the exercise
of this power, have either justly or unjustly impaired the credit of the
state and of its individual citizens in the commercial and financial
centers of the world. With immense resources undeveloped and a con-
sequent nfeed of capital from sources where it is in excess, the people find
capital repelled by legislation which would seem to be so far in conflict
with the rights of capital as to put the best interests of the people them-
selves at hazard."

The result of the conditions so clearly explained by Gqv. Luding-
ton was that the legislature repealed the Potter law and legislative
made freight rates came to an end in Wisconsin for all time, al-

Railway Regulation. 207

though an attempt to revive that system was again made in 1903
and 1905. In place of three commissioners provision was made for
the election of one commissioner, whose duties were administrative
in character. A Wisconsin classification and a maximum rate were
established and laws were enacted, which were amended and
strengthened from time to time, giving the commissioner super-
visory powers over railway corporations. For twenty-nine years the
system of railway regulation then established was continued in
this state. The character of the supervision depended largely upon
the ability, industry and moral strength of the commissioner elected
by the people. It goes without saying that some of the commis-
sioners were strong, while others were weak.

208 Political Reform m Wisconsin.

CHAPTER IV.
A. E. Hall Begins His Crusade.

The second period of agitation against the railroads in Wisconsin
began with the election of A. E. Hall to the assembly from Dunn
county in 1891. Mr. Hall had acquired experience in the Minne-
sota legislature, where he had served several terms, and he soon
came to be acknowledged as a master parliamentarian. To his
experience and ability he united patience and tenacity of a high
order and these qualities equipped him admirably for the long and
arduous contest which he waged for the anti-railroad cause, a
contest that was preliminary to the pitched battle led by Eobert
M. La PoUette when he came to the governorship in 1901.

Mr. Hall began his skirmish by accusing the railroad companies
of evading a portion of their just taxes. As already has been ex-
plained in a previous chapter of this review, he demanded an ex-
amination into the sufficiency of the taxes paid by the railroad
corporations in 1891, and again in 1893. During this time he
did not ask that the state avail itself of the right to fix freight rates
in advance and prescribe in what manner all the details of the busi-
ness of the corporations should be managed, but he was progressing
toward that point. As a matter of fact, even in his resolutions on
the taxation question and in his reports as a committeeman to
the legislature, he did comment on the revenues of railroad com-
panies and attempt to show that the freight rates collected enabled
them to earn large profits on the capital invested.

In the meantime other states, Iowa in particular, had been ex-
perimenting with rate regulation by adopting the only system pos-
sible where states establish rates through commissions appointed
for that purpose — the distance tariff. Under this system the de-
termining factors considered by the state's officers in fixing rates
are (a) distance hauled; (b) weight; (c) bulk; (d) classification.
The rates thus established are arbitrary and inflexible. The needs
of an industry or community can not be considered. The whole
problem is reduced to a simple mathematical computation. Trade
can not be fostered; railroad companies can not take steps to de-
velop tonnage along their lines by adopting a system of rates that
will place all producers on an equal footing; the manufacturers
and farmers near the markets must be permitted to enjoy their
geographical advantage over those living at a distance because a
distance tariff, while tt meets the demand for mathematical accu-
racy, admits of no adjustment that may be required by economic or
industrial conditions.

The Potter law of 1874 was a distance tariff law of the most
crude and illogical character and it did not take long to demon-
strate that the transportation business of the state could not be

Railway Regulation. 209

conducted under its provisions to the satisfaction of either the rail-
roads or their patrons. Every indication pointed to the fact that,
if that law vrere to be continued in force, the enormous natural
resources of the state would lie idle for all time simply because
they could not be developed under- distance tariff conditions.

It is true that a state can not prescribe rates to be charged on
interstate traffic and that a large percentage of the transportation
business of a state like Wisconsin is intersfete business. It has been
estimated that no more than 20 per cent of the freight carried in
this state is subject to state regulation. But, where a state draws
a .line at its borders and says that all business transacted inside that
line must submit to certain arbitrary and inelastic rules and
rates, the carriers are in a measure forced to recognize that line,
as they did in the cases of Iowa and Texas, making their interstate
rates to the line and adding, local rates for the state.

In 1905 A. E. Hall introduced in the legislature his first rail-
road commission bill, or bills, for there were two of them. No. 146A,
and No. 148A. The first was "A bill to establish a board of rail-
road commissioners, prescribe their qualifications, fix their salaries,
and for the appointment of a secretary of such board and to fix his
salary." The second was "A bill to regulate railway corporations
and other co.mmon carriers in this state, and to define the powers
and duties of the board of railroad commissioners in relation to the
same, and to prevent and punish extortion and unjust discrimina-
tion in the rates charged for the transportation of passengers and
freight on railroads in this state, and to prescribe the mode of pro-
cedure and rules of evidence in relation thereto, and to repeal all
laws in force in direct conflict with this act." These bills were
both introduced in the assembly by Mr. Hall on Jan. 39, 1895.
(Page 106 Assembly Journal.)

It was in connection with these bills that Mr. Hall played a
trick on the opposition that took them by surprise. While the bills
were pending he prepared circular letters explaining the purpose
of the bills and mailed them to every township and election pre-
cinct in the state asking that a referendum vote be taken at the
annual spring election on the matter. Blanks were furnished for
recording the vote and tickets for and against the measures y^eie
also supplied.

All this work was done secretly, the only man taken into his
confidence at first being Assemblyman James 0. Davidson, now
governor. These two gentlemen worked behind locked doors for
several nights until they were worn out with fatigue, and they then
took into their counsel as an assistant a committee clerk in whose
discretion Mr. Davidson had confidence, and the work of folding
and addressing the circulars, blanks and tickets was then completed.
The time selected for mailing the circulars was well chosen, for
those who received them were given an opportunity to present them

210 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

to the voters on town meeting day, while the men who would nat-
urally be opposed to the bills were not given time to organize their
forces to vote against the indorsement.

In the meantime the opposition had been busy circulating peti-
tions against the measures, and their labors had been successful.
Shortly after the introduction of the bills word was sent out that
Mr. Hall was endeavoring to secure the passage of a rate regulation
law, and the business men of the state became active. On April 9,
the day the two bills came up for indefinite postponement on re-
port of the committee on railroads, to which committee they had
been referred, there were on file in the assembly 83 petitions for and
338 against the measures.

But the referendum vote had also come in on that day, reports
having been received from 330 polling places at which 30,853 votes
had been cast in favor of the bills and 587 against them. Of
course, where a vote is taken in this informal, voluntary manner,
the reports were not complete in all details. In some cases only
the affirmative vote was given in the report; in others the state-
ment was made that the vote was "unanimous ;" the total- number
of votes cast being omitted. The records of these memorials are
printed on the Assembly Journal, pages 905 to 913 inclusive..

As has been said, the railroad committee of the assembly re-
ported the Hall bills for indefinite postponement. This report was
made on March 38 before the referendum vote had been taken (page
780, Assembly Journal), and action had been deferred from time
to time at Mr. Hall's request, or through his skillful management,
until the returns should come in from the election precincts. The
final vote was taken on April 9 and resulted in 61 members favoring
indefinite postponement and 18 opposing that action. Both bills
suffered the same fate by the same vote (page 938, Assembly
Journal), and Mr. Hall's efforts along that line were suspended
for four years, or until 1899.

It is only fair to say that the proposed measures were not in
any respect like the Potter law. No attempt was made to fix freight
rates by statute, that business being left largely to the commission
should one be appointed. There were some provisions in the bill
that were unobjectionable and salutary and which were later in-
oorporated in substance, if not in form, into the law enacted in
1905. The principal objection to the bills was that they were
crudely drawn; that they would unnecessarily and unwisely have
forced the 'abandonment of policies and practices that the business
interests of the state required and upon which their continued pros-
perity largely depended; and that they contained provisions that,
were they to be put in force, would have hampered the corporations
in the operation of their transportation lines without securing to
the patrons of the roads any corresponding benefit.

Justice to Mr. Hall's memory, however, demands that the fact

Railway Requiamon. 211

be recorded that no suggestion ever came from him that the ad-
ministration of the affairs of the railroads be taken entirely out of
the hands of the corporation officers and placed in those of a po-
litical commission. His railroad regulation bills were crude and
impossible of successful operation, it is true, but they were far su-
perior to — and would have been less harmful in operation than — ^the
Potter law, the Texas law, the Iowa law, or the radical measure
proposed for enactment in 1903 at the instance of Eobert M. La
PoUette.

The principal reason for the defeat of the Hall bills may be
found in the fact that Wisconsin legislators and business men had
not forgotten the Potter law and its disastrous consequences. Ob-
jectionable practices had crept into the transportation business, in
some cases and there were many who realized that certain correc-
tions should be made in the methods of doing business. But the
one fact that stood out sun clear^ about which there could be no
mistake, was that the one attempt to regulate freight rates by law
in Wisconsin had been a colossal blunder. It was a lively apprecia-
tion of this fact more than any other thing that determined the
fate of the Hall bills in 1895.

212 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE V.
The Hall Bills in 1899 and. 1901.

Feb. 17, 1899, A. R. Hall, still in the assembly, introduced two
bills. No. 388A and No. 389A, which were almost identical in form
and substance with the two defeated in 1895. In the meantime a
lively anti-railroad campaign had been carried on by the partisans
of E. M. La Follette and under the leadership of that gentleman,
who had been a candidate for the republican gubernatorial nomina-
iton in 1896 and 1898 on an anti-corporation platform. It will be
remembered that Mr. La Follette began his "anti" campaign shortly
after his first defeat for the nomination. He took to the lecture
platform and when the time came to hold county fairs he "followed
the ponies" about the state preaching the doctrine of the total de-
pravity of the corporations, great and small, who were supposed
to be "grinding the faces of the poor."

During the year 1897 and well into the summer of 1898 the one
text selected by Mr. La Follette upon which to base his numerous
political sermons was this one of corporation depravity, and the
railroads were held up as shining examples of the iniquity of
corporate greed. It was not until fully eighteen months after
the opening of this perpetual campaign that the primary election
idea was injected into the proceedings, and even then the new issue
was urged merely as a means to an end, a measure by which "the
people" could secure control of the offices and enforce their will.
That a campaigner of Mr. La Follette's force, energy and care-
fully prepared eloquence had some influence on popular sentiment
goes without saying. There were more men in the assembly who
were prepared to vote for almost any kind of a railroad regulation
bill in 1899 than there had been in 1895, and there were still more
who, out of respect for public opinion as they understood it, were
not disposed to vote either way and dodged.

An examination of the proposed laws showed that the same
objections urged against them in 1895 still held good. There was
the best of reasons for believing that were these bills to pass and
become laws the splendid system of commodity and concentration
rates, under which the industries of the state had been built up,
would be abolished. While the rates were not specifically men-
tioned, all discriminations of every character were forbidden and
the concentration and commodity rates are, in fact, based upon
discriminations. There were many wholesome provisions in the
bills, but there were other objections besides the one mentioned that
made it a dangerous experiment to place them upon the statute
books and they were again defeated.

On April 12 the railroad committee, to whom the two bills had
been referred, returned them to the assembly without recommenda-

Railway Regulation. 213

tion, and on April 35, after action had been postponed twice at
Mr. Hall's request, the measures were refused engrossment and
third reading. There was no roll call on bill No. 389, but on its
companion measure. No. 388, the vote recorded was, for the bill,
26 ; against it, 40 ; absent or not voting, 34. The question was on
passing the bill to engrossment and third reading, and the record
of the vote follows :

Yeas — Messrs. Anderson, Baldoek, Barber, Benson, Dahl, Dodge,
Frost, Hall, Harvey, Holcomb, Holland, Humphrey, Kempley, McDonald,
McGreer, Moore, Morgan, Morse, Mosher, Olson, Porter, Rasmussen,
Ripley, Ryan J., Sneddon and Sturdevant— 26.

Nays — Messrs. Barlow, Buttles, Cashin, Catlin, Daggett, Dengel,
Dresser, Eline, Evans, Fogo, Galaway, Germer, Gilmore, Grube, Har-
tung, Hurlbut, Jensen, Johnston, Keene, Killilea, Lange, Logan, Orton,
Overbeck, Parker, Policy, Rechlicz, Roettinger, Rowell, Rusk, Ryan M.
W., Schoenbaum, True, Wagner, Werheim, Williams, Willot, Willy,
Wylie, and Mr. Speaker — 40.

Absent or not voting — Messrs. Adams, Becker, Bryant, BufBngton,
Clough, Elba, Farr, Feige, Flaherty, Gagnon, Gawin, Grootematt, Guth,
Hoehle, Hunt, Ives, Johnson, Kessler, Loth, McGrath, McLeod, Middle-
ton, Minch, Ricb'ardson, Sarau, Slade, Soltwedel, Steiger, Thiesenhusen.
Thomas, Vandercook, Wills, Wheeler, and Zinn— ;34.

Jan. 34, 1901, A. R. Hall for the third time introduced a bill
to regulate the railroads. This time he consolidated his ■two meas-
ures into one, but that was practically the only change made. The"
title of the measure ran as follows :

"A bill to regulate railway corporations and other common carriers,
in this state, to create a board of railway commissioners and define its
powers and duties, to prevent and punish excessive rates and unjust
discriminations in the rates charged for the transportation of passengers
and freights, to prescribe the modes of procedure and rules of evidence
in relation thereto, and to repeal all laws in conflict with the provisions
of this act."

The time that elapsed betjveen the introduction of this bill by
Mr. Hall on Jan. 24 and its defeat by indefinite postponement
April 10 saw the end of the preliminary skirmish and the beginning
of the pitched battle for railway rate regulation in Wisconsin. Not-
withstanding his early antagonism to the railroad corporations at
the time he was a defeated candidate for the republican guberna-
torial nomination. Gov. La Pollette had, from the time of the third
announcement of his candidacy in the spring of 1900 down to the
defeat of his primary election bill on April 11, 1901, maintained a
not unfriendly attitude toward the railroads. During the early
weeks of the session, in fact, he had appeared in a distinctly friendly
attitude toward those corporations and it is certain that Mr.. Hall
got little encouragement from the executive chamber while laboring
to secure support for his bill. ,!

But, as the weeks passed and the certainty of securing th^ pas-
sage of the primary elec^on measure began to fade, Goy. La Toi-
lette's friendship for the railroads cooled. The Hall railroad com-

214 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

mission bill came up too late to get the benefit of this changed atti-
tude — as did the railway taxation bills— and to this fact may be
attributed the strength of the vote against it in the assembly when
it came up for indefinite postponement on April 10, one day before
the primary bill was killed in the senate. When the vote was
taken there were 74 members of the assembly who were willing to
go on record as being opposed to the bill and but 24 who favored
it — 3 less than the number who voted for its passage ia 1899. And
this, too, in a body that was acknowledged to be under the control
of the governor. No one has ever disputed the truth of the state-
ment that the assembly was organized to support the administration
in 1901. No explanation can be offered for the overwhelming de-
feat of the Hall railroad regulation bill in that body except that
Gov. La Follette permitted, if he did not advise, his followers to
vote against it until it was too late to change and pass it. Among
the names of members who voted for indefinite postponement will
be found a fair proportion of men who supported administration
measures in season and out of season, men who were open and ac-
knowledged "Bobites," as the partisans of the governor came to be
called later.

The vote on the Hall bill. No. 78A, is recorded on page 833 of
the Assembly Journal for 1901 as follows, the question being on
the indefinite postponement of the measure:

Yeas — Ainsworth, Andrew, Barker, Barlow, Benson, Burdeau, Cady,
Clark, Cleopas, Coapman, Collins, Duerrwaechter, Eager, Ela, Eline,
Erlckson, Esau, Evans David J., Evans Evan W., Fesenfeld, Flaherty,
Gagnon, Galaway, Gawln, Hanson, Hartung, Hodgins, Holland, Jensen,
Johnston, Jones, Karel, Katz, Keene, Kern, Krumrey, Lane, McCabe,
McComb, MeCormick, McGill, McMillan, Manuel, Maloney, Miller E. A.,
Miller Herman, Moldenhauer, Norton, Orton, Overbeck, Park, Pomrening,
Price, Rasmussen, Rogers, Root, Rossman, Sarau, Schellenberg, Silk-
worth, Slade, Smalley, Smith, Soltwedel, Steiger, Thiessenhusen,
Thomas, Valentine, Whitson, Williams E. A., Willott, Young, Zinn, and
Mr. Speaker — 74.

Nays — Anderson, Babb, Brunson, Cook, Dahl, Dodge, Fenelon, Frost,
Gilman, Hagerty, Hall, Henry, Johnson F., Johnson H., Lenroot, Middle-
ton, Owen, Rankl, Roe, Spratt, Stevens, Sturdevant, Swenholt, and
Williams J. C— 24.

Absent or not voting — Messrs. Dow and Minor — 2.

This ended Mr. Hall's connection with railroad legislation in
Wisconsin, as his last term of service in the Wisconsin assembly
closed with that biennial period. On the whole his record was a
creditable one, notwithstanding the fact that he earned the repu-
tation of being an enemy of the railroads. He was a "progressive"
in fact as well as in name and he consistently supported all reform
legislation from whatever source it emanated. He aided in the
passage in the bills by which the temporary and permanent tax
commissions were organized ; he was a friend of the Whitehead bills
by which a new system of taxation was prescribed for the tele-

Railway Regulation. 215

graph, express, and sleeping ear companies ; his support was given
to the corrupt practices act in 1897, to the insurance taxation
measure introduced by. Judge Orton in 1899, and to many other
wholesome and salutary laws. And he has been given full credit for
his labors by the people of Wisconsin whom he served.

This ended also the preliminary skirmish for railroad legis-
lation designed to improve and inodernize the Wisconsin statutes
relating to that subject. From this time until the present law was
enacted in 1905, the fight of the administration forces, led by Gov-
ernor La Follette, was of a different character.

216 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE VI.
La Follette Takes Up the Fight.

In the section of this review devoted to the history of the pri-
mary election movement the political developments at Madison
during the legislative session of 1901 are explained at considerable
length. It is unnecessary here to repeat the details of the factional
dispute which made that period memorable, but it is important that
no opening be left for misunderstanding with respect to certain
facts relating to the declaration of war on the railroad corporations
that accompanied, although it did not cause, the disruption of the
republican party in Wisconsin.

In his first biennial message to the legislature in January, 1901,
,Gov. La Follette had nothing to say on the subject of railroad rate
regulation. As has been shown, Mr. Hall had, in 1895 and 1899,
introduced bills designed, in a measure, to control freight rates,
and the governor had himself conducted a frantic anti-corporation
campaign from the time he was defeated for the gubernatorial nom-
ination in 1896 up to a period shortly antedating his third an-
nouncement as a candidate for that office. Following his message
and during the entire time the Hall railroad regulation bill was
before the assembly in 1901 there is not one line in the records
to indicate that the governor raised a finger to aid Mr. Hall. On
the contrary, his silence and the known antagonism to the measure
of many of his most subservient followers all indicated that he was
opposed to the bill.

But the failure of his attempt to dictate to the legislature in
other matters, mainly the primary election bill, angered Gov. La
Follette beyond all reason, and, to use a homely metaphor, "he
began to rock the boat." He sent in his veto of the Hagemeister
primary bill and his celebrated "dog tax veto." He tongue lashed
the members of the legislature who had refused to do his bidding
and started in to make good his threat to "drive from public life
in this state every man who opposed him." Naturally the railroads,
conservative by force of circumstances and the nature of their busi-
ness, were placed under the ban and marked for punishment of an
exemplary character.

Shortly after the adjournment of the legislature in the spring
of 1901 Gov. La Follette's health became impaired and in the late
summer he was forced to abandon his official duties entirely. For
weeks and months he was invisible, his physician prescribing abso-
lute rest and a strict diet. There was nothing doing at the ex-
ecutive chamber during the summer and early autumn months.
Lieut. Gov. Jesse Stone was not called in to perform the duties
that, under the constitution, devolved upon him in the event of the
total disability of the executive, but the governor was invisible to

Eailway Rkgotation. 217

all but his physician and family just the same. The private secre-
tary kept the executive office open during the interim and met all
inquiries with evasive replies.

Meanwhile there was a cessation of hostilities. The leading news-
papers opposed to Gov. La Follette's policies and methods studi-
ously avoided criticising him out of fear that they would be ac-
cused of attaclang a sick man, and little was done in either camp
except to prepare for the battle promised for the following year.
The Wisconsin Eepublican league organized and began collecting
names for a partial poll list of voters, but this work was all of a
preliminary character.

The campaign of 1903 was an anti-corporation campaigu, with
all the term implies, on the part of the state administration faction.
The main issue, it is true, was the governor's primary election prop-
osition, but, having failed to secure the passage of that measure at
the last session of the legislature, the "anti" campaign was organ-
ized and conducted with all the energy that characterized the
earlier La Pollette crusades against the railroads and other alleged
oppressors of the people. But even in those circumstances there was
less said about rate regulation than there was about the taxation
of corporations. The governor, who led the forces in person, de-
voted a greater part of his time and talents to the discussion of
what he considered the most popular issues. It has been his custom
always to center his attention upon one or two propositions which
he can present in the most effective manner, leaving other matters,
that may be of equal importance, for use in subsequent campaigns.

And this is what he did in 1903. He wisely refused to "scatter"
and worked away manfully at the primary and taxation issues, as
he saw them, leaving the subject of rate regulation to be used in
the next campaign. But he did not neglect it entirely. There
was enough about the right of the state to control corporations in
his speeches and literature to indicate to the man who was ac-
quainted with his political methods that the railroad rate question
was in the incubator.

Gov. La Pollette was renominated and re-elected, and his rail-
road regulation scheme came out of its shell. It was not a new
idea, being copied mainly from the Iowa law, but there were some
features of the bill he subsequently advocated that were peculiarly
offensive to Wisconsin business men and manufacturers.

The governor opened the pitched battle for railroad regulation
in his message read in person to the legislature on Jan. 15, 1903;
In that message he took the ground that it was not only the right
but the duty of the legislature to provide for the creation of a
commission armed with authority to fix freight and passenger rates
"in advance." He would not be satisfied with a board' that could
only review rates and pass upon their reasonableness. He wanted
a body that could sit down in the capitol building and draw up a

218 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

schedule of freight tariffs for every road doing business in Wisconsin
and force the adoption of that schedule. The message is a long
one, covering, with its statistical supplement, 12© pages of the
assembly journal, and it was looked upon as a distinct declaration
of war against the common carriers.

The next move in the war game was the intrqduction by the
assembly coriimittee on railroads of bill Fo. 623A on JVIarch 6, 1903
(page 473, Assembly Journal). This committee was appointed
by Irvine L. Lenroot, the speaker, and no one doubted that they
would report just such a bill as the governor wanted. No one ever
accused Gov. La Follette of drafting the measure. It was an open
secret at Madison at that time that, however able he might be
as a propagandist, however eloquently he might express his
opinions about measures and . men, however extensive might be
his references to statistics in support of his propositions, he lacked
the ability to frame legislative measures that would be satisfac-
tory even to himself. But he had in his councils men who were
expert in the business of drawing bills, and they put his ideas into
form. The committee that reported the rate regulation bill was
made up as follows : C. W. Gilman, chairman ; J. A. Frear, W. S.
Braddock, E. Ainsworth, E. B. Tarrell, George P. Stevens, George
E. Beedle, 0. G. Kinney, W. S. Irvine, F. M. Eeed, and Lewis
Benson, the latter being a democrat.

While this bill did not provide, as did the Potter law in 1874,
for a statutory schedule of freight rates, it went even farther than
the early law in the matter of interference with railroad companies
in the transaction of their business and it provided for a distance
tariff as illogical and destructive in its tendencies as that of the
Potter law. There are thousands of people in this state who never
knew to what extent this revolutionary measure of Gov. La Pol-
lette's presumed to go. They read the accounts of the controversy
in the newspapers and they took sides for or against the governor's
proposition on the strength of the presentation of arguments, but
the bald, naked proposition to take the management of the railroads
entirely out of the hands of the officers elected by the stockholders
and entrust it to a board of commissioners appointed by the gov-
ernor of the state was a point that did not find lodgment in the
public mind as clearly as it should have done. That this is not an
overstatement of the purposes of the measure is shown by the fol-
lowing quotations from the bill itself :

"Powers and duties. Section 8. Tlie board may, from time to time,
carefully examine into and inspect the condition of each railroad, its
equipment and the manner of its conduct and management with regard
to the public safety and convenience ; make annual examination of its
bridges, and,. if found by it to be unsafe, it shall immediately notify the
railroad company whose duty it is to put the same in repair; such re-
pairs shall be made by said company iwithin ten days after receiving
such notice. If any railroad fails to perform this duty, the board shall
forbid and prevent it from running trains over such bridges while

Railway Regulation. 219

unsafe. It shall inspect all railroad time tables and see that as close
connections as practicable are made at the several junction points within
the state, between trains of connecting lines or branches. When, in the
judgment of the board, any railroad fails in any respect to comply with
the terms of its charter, articles of incorporation, or the laws of the state,
or when, in its judgment, any repairs are necessary upon its road, or
any additions to its rolling stock or additions to or change in its stations
or station houses, or change in its rate of fare for transportation of
freight or passengers, OB CHANaE IN THE MODE OF OPERATING
ITS ROAD OR CONDUCTING ITS BUSINESS is reasonaUe or EX-
PEDIENT, in order to promote the security, convenience or accommoda-
tion of the public, the board shall make such order, as the facts found
by it may warrant, and serve a copy on such railroad, in the manner
provided for the service of summons in a civil action in courts of record,
which order shall be signed by the secretary or any member of said
board. Such order shall specify what shall be done by said railroad,
and if there shall be a neglect or refusal to comply with such order,
the board may, in its discretion, cause suit or proceedings to be insti-
tuted to enforce its orders as provided in this act."

' One more quotatioii from the bill is necessary in order that a
thorough understanding may be had of its revolutionary character.
Under the rate making system then in force, and which has not
since been changed, the railroads had promulgated schedules de-
signed to foster and build up the manufacturing and agricultural
industries of the state. They had adopted what was known as the
"zone system," by which a number of cities and manufacturing
points were grouped together and all given the same rate to the
markets or distributing points, regardless of distance. This was
done in order that industries might be distributed along the lines
of the several railroads wherever they could- manufacture to ad-
vantage. Also, there had been established the splendid system of
concentration and commodity rates described in a previous chapter
under which the agricultural interests of the state had been rescued
from threatening bankruptcy in 1875 and raised to unexampled
prosperity in 1903. All this Gov. La Follette proposed to change,
for another section of his proposed law read as follows : ^

"Commissioners' , Schedules of Rates — Effects. Section 24. The
schedules of maximum rates of charges for the transportation of freight
and cars, together with the classification of freights now in effect, shall
remain in force until changed by the board according to law, and, in all
actions brought against railroads, wherein there are involved charges for
the transportation of any freight or cars, or any unjust discrimination in
relation thereto, shall be taken as prima facie evidence in all courts that
the rates fixed therein are reasonable and just maximum rates of
charges. The board shall from time to time, and as often as circum-
stances may require, change and revise such schedules, but the rates
fixed shalPnot be higher than established by law. The board shall
give notice of its intention to revise or change such schedules by mailing
a copy thereof to the railroad to be afCected thereby and by publishing
a notice thereof in such newspaper as the board may direct for two suc-
cessive weeks, the last publication of such notice to be at least ten days
before the time fixed for considering the matter, and such notice shall
contain, in general terms, a statement of the matters which the board

220 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

proposes to consider, and the date when and the place where the matter
will be taken up. * * *"

The remainder of the section provides for publishing and serv-
ing copies of decisions of the board establishing new schedules of
rates.

Buf this was not all. In the substitute bill introduced by the
same committee April 34 (Page 900, Assembly Journal), the sec-
tion here quoted was changed by requiring the board to make an
entirely new schedule of rates at the start, or "as soon as practi-
cable," the purpose being to abolish at the earliest possible moment
the schedules of rates made by the railroad traffic men and substi-
tute in their places other schedules of distance tariff rates made by
the members of the board. The language of the substitute bill is
unequivocal and definite on this point, for it says :

"Section 24. The board shall prepare, as soon as practicable, sched-
ules of reasonable maximum rates for the transportation of passengers
and property between the various stations on the lines of the several
railroads within the state and the several terminal and junction stations
situated therein ; a separate schedule to be prepared for the line or lines
of railroad within the state operated by each individual railroad, and
also similar schedules of MILEAGE RATES for application to traffic
between all other stations on the several lines within the state ; and
shall also prepare a uniform classification of articles of freight for use
in connection with said schedules."

This provision takes the place of the one in the section pre-
viously quoted from the original bill establishing the existing sched-
ules as maximum rates until changed by the board, the remainder
of the section being unchanged in the substitute.

After providing for the establishment of a distance tariff, or
"schedules of mileage rates," which is the same thing, the substitute
bill provided in Section 31 that commodity rates might be per-
mitted, but no provision was made for zone rates, or concentration
rates, without which the commodity rate would be of little value to
the shippers. A commodity distance tariff is a distance tariff,
and geographical location vrould be a more important item under
such a system than it is now.

Railway Regulation. 221

CHAPTEK VII.
Governor vs. Manufacturers and Shippers.

The substitute for assembly bill No. 623 was reported by the
committee on railroads April 24, 1903. Four days later Gov. La
Follette transmitted to the legislature a special message of 108
pages, with a statistical supplement of seventy-five pages giving
comparisons of rates in Wisconsin, Iowa, and Illinois prepared by
the commissioner of labor and industrial statistics. It was the
governor's purpose to show that, under the distance tariff of Iowa
and the maximum rates established by the Illinois railroad com-
mission, conditions were much more favorable to shippers than
they were in Wisconsin.

April 29, the day following the receipt of the governor's mes-
sage by the legislature, the largest gathering of business men ever
held in Madison for consultation on a subject of legislation pend-
ing at the time was convened in that city for the purpose of pro-
testing against the passage of the measure. The written protest
was signed by 164 firms, manufacturing corporations, and indi-
viduals, one of whom represented an association numbering 165
manufacturers, merchants, a;id shippers doing business at Sheboy-
gan.

The governor's message was an attempted justification of the
distance tariff system of railroad rates. The word "attempted" is
used because no such justification is possible in sound reason and
logic. The business of a country can not be transacted solely by
mathematical rules. Industrial science is not merely an appeal to
mathematical formulas as a method of disposing of all probelms
as they arise. If that were the case, any graduate of a ward school
would be as competent to make freight rates as the most experfenc-
ed traffic man, for all he would need to do would be to apply the
rules of addition, substraction, and multiplication and the most
complicated rate question would be answered.

- Furthermore, it was shown to the satisfaction of a majority of
the members of the legislature that the figures contained in the
tables accompanying both the biennial and special message were un-
reliable and misleading. The statistician had taken the published
distance tariffs of the railroads of Wisconsin, under which traffic
was seldom moved, and compared them with the regular working
tariffs of other states which controlled all the business transacted
by the common carriers in those states. In other words, he had se-
lected the highest rates he could find in Wisconsin and compared
them with the lowest rates in other states. The Wisconsin distance
tariffs governed but a small per cent of traffic — about 2 per cent,
in fact — while the Iowa rates given were the regular tariffs under
which practically all of the tonnage in the state was carried.

222 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

Another important feature of the governor's tables was that
they were full of errors, whether made by the man who prepared
the tables or by the printer does not appear. Burton Hanson,
general solicitor for the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul road,
made the assertion before the railroad committee that one table
accompanying Gov. La Follette's biennial message contained "637
distinct errors, nearly all of which are against the railroad com-
panies."

But the important point about all of the governor's arguments
and comparative statistics was that he had used the distance tariffs
in Wisconsin, when he should have taken the commodity and mer-
chandise tariffs under which the freight business of the state was
transacted. As the Iowa rates used in the tables in making com-
parisons were the regular rates controlling traflBc in that state, the
lowest rates in all cases, the comparisons were clearly and demon-
strably unfair, and the demonstration was made to the satisfaction
of the members of the legislature. This fact should be kept in
mind, for it explains why Gov. La Follette failed to secure the
adoption of the Iowa system of railroad rate regulation in Wiscon-
sin in 1903, and it explains also why he failed again in 1905, al-
though he used the same figures and the same methods in his sec-
ond attempt.

April 29, the day following the delivery of the special message
to the legislature and one day prior to the date set for final action
on the bill, the meeting of business men and shippers already men-
tioned was held at Madison. This meeting was called -for consul-
tation and to formulate a protest against the passage of the pend-
ing measure. The call for co-operation in resisting the threatened
change was signed by sixty-five manufacturing firms and corpora-
tions doing business at Madison, Wausau, Eacine, Kenosha,
Menasha, Green Bay, and other places. After talking the matter
over the meeting determined to draw up a formal protest against
the passage of the bill and lay their views before the members of
the legislature. The protest was drawn and printed, and a copy
furnished to each member by placing it upon his desk.

In their protest the shippers gave the reasons why they were
opposed to the enactment of a law like the one proposed. They
explained that, after many years of labor and concerted effort, the
producers of Wisconsin had succeeded in bringing about the adop-
tion by the railroads of "such commodity, group, and concentra-
tion rates as are best fitted to develop their business interests and
promote the growth of the state." They took upon themselves the re-
sponsibility for the establishment of the system of rates then in
force, which were the result of years of conference, experiment,
and adjustment, in which the shippers had taken the initiative —
not the railroads. The system was, therefor, a logical growth de-
signed to meet the demands of the commerce of the state, and it

Railway Regulation. 223

conformed closely to the interstate system of rates. This had been
accomplished, they said, "with the least injury to any of the inter-
ests of the state; indeed^ it has resulted to the general benefit of all.
In dependence upon these rates large investments have been made,
great manufacturing and shipping industries have been built lap,
and plans perfected which will materially aid in the future growth
of the state." They continued:

"We believe that any attempt to disturb this system of transporta-
tion rates /will unsettle the business affairs of the state, endanger invest-
ments, and interfere with the development of our industries."

The protest which was of considerable length, also explained
the probable effect of such a law, upon the commodity rates,
notwithstanding the section that was supposed to permit of
such rates. To the legislators they said that the section that
professed to grant this privilege expressly forbade it, as it abso-
lutely prohibited the granting of zone, or group, rates, and
established a distance tariff system. A distance tariff is a distance
tariff for commodities as well as for other classifications, and it
was a distance tariff they were protesting against.

This issue was met by Gov. La FoUette and his followers in the
legislature with the statement that these men were in Madison at
the mandate of the railroad officials. They were either receiving
unjust discriminations, it was argued, or were afraid they would
be subjected to adverse discriminations if they did not come to the
aid of the transportation corporations in their hour of need. Spe-
cific cases were even cited — the names of the persons or firms in-
terested being concealed, it was explained, because of the injury
such a disclosure would work to them — ^where threats had been
made, it was alleged, of unjust discriminations should the suppos-
ed victim presume to act contrary to the wishes of the railroad of-
ficers.

But this argument would not stand alone while it was being
answered. - Had the manufacturers and shippers of the state been
so entirely at the mercy of the railroad companies that they feared
ruin at their hands, they would willingly have permitted a law to
be enacted placing it beyond the power of those corporations to
injure them. In that case they would gladly have flocked to
Madison in support of the bill in as great, if not greater, numbers
than they did to protest against the enactment of such a law.

The plain fact is that the business industries of the state had
been built up under the system of freight rates then in force.
They depended for their very existence on the zone, commodity
and concentration rates. Millions of dollars had been invested in
manufacturing enterprises under conditions that were now threat-
ened with a revolutionary change and the certainty of loss was un-
questionable should the proposed changes be made. Manufactur-
ers who had established themselves at favorable points near mar-

224 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

kets and who shipped their raw materials long distances had no
way of knowing what the proposed distance tariff system would do
to their business except that it would necessarily increase the cost
of their product by increasing the cost of their raw materials.
Other producers, who were long distances from markets, were in a
quandary as to how they would be able to deliver their products
under a distance tariff in competition with rivals who were more
favorably situated with respect to geographical location. It was
a veritable industrial revolution that was impending, and an in-
dustrial revolution, also, that spelled removal or ruin to some of
the most important manufacturing establishments in the state.

tlAiLWAT Regulation. 22^

CHAPTEE VIII.
The Bill Defeated.

But the danger was averted by the defeat of the bill. The pro-
test of the merchants and manufacturers was signed and issued
April 29. Bill No. 623A came up as the special order at 10 o'clock
a. m., April 30 (page 1003, Assembly Journal). A motion was
made by Chaii'man Gilnian of the railroad committee that the as-
sembly go into committee of the whole to consider the bill and
substitute, the intention being to give an opportunity for oratory,
but the motion was defeated by a vote of yeas 43, nays 50, absent
or not voting 7.

Torger G. Thompson, member from Dane county, then moved
an amendment in the form of a substitute for section 1 of the bill,
in which amendment an elective commission was provided for in
place of the one to be appointed by the governor. This motion
was defeated (page 1004, A. J.) by a vote of yeas 10, nays 84 ab-
sent or not voting 6. The assembly then adjourned until 2 o'clock
p. m.

The entire afternoon session was taken up with the considera-
tion of this measure (page 1005 A. J.), Speaker Lenroot having
called Assemblyman Smalley to the chair, as he desired to take
an active part in the debate. It is a significant fact that, although
there was no question about the position Gov. La Follette had sus-
tained from the first to this measure, and notwithstanding his two
messages' on the subject,. when it came up for final action only the
members who. followed the governor without question, as the light
brigade charged at Balaklava, favored its enactment into law.
There were many administration followers in the assembly who
were willing to go almost any length to carry out his general polit-
ical program. They believed that "nothing succeeds like success."
They looked upon Gov. La Follette as a star to which they had
hitched their wagons. But there is a limit beyond which even an
aspiring politician can not go at times and that limit was reached
when practically the entire business element of the state entered
into a protest against the bill urged by Gov. La Follette for pass-
age.

A vote was not taken at the afternoon session as the adminis-
tration forces, led by Speaker Lenroot, were determined to leave
no stone unturned to put the measure through, or at least to make
a good showing. They were playing for a record. They knew,
or had reason to believe, their bill was doomed,. but it was the pol-
icy of Gov. La Follette always to have an issue in reserve, and this
railway regulation issue would serve his purpose if it were defeated,
as it was in the end. The burden of the argument in the speeches
for the administration side of the debate ^ras the same as that of

226 PoMTicAL Reform in Wisconsin.

the governor's message — unjust discrimination which was alleged
to operate to prevent the producers of Wisconsin from reaping as
much profit from their business as did their competitors in other
states, particularly ia lowa.^ The opposition took their stand upon
the protest issued by the manufacturers and merchants, and main-
tained- that the bill, should it become a law, would prove to be des-
tructive, and not constructive, in its character. ,

A vote on the measure was reached at the evening session of
the same day, it having occupied the attention of the assembly
since 10 o'clock in the forenoon. The first vote was on a referen-
dum amendment offered by Assemblyman Le Eoy of Marinette,
which was defeated by an affirmative vote of 37 to 56 negatives.
The next question was on the adoption of the assembly railroad
committee's amendment as a substitute for the original bill. This
motion also was defeated by an afSmative vote of 34, against a
negative vote of 59 (page 1007, A. J.). Then came the vote on
the original bill and assemblyman Eay of La Crosse moved that it
be indefinitely postponed, which motion was carried, yeas 67,
nays 25, paired 4, absent or not voting 4, Following is the report
of the roll call (page 1008, A. J.) :

Yeas — Messrs. Arneman, Barker, Bartzen, Becker, Benson (the demo-
cratic member of the committee on railroads), Bradford, Breitwiseh,
Cady, Carpenter, Coffland, Cosgrove, Cowling, Crowley, Dinsdale, Dixon,
Donald, Dudgeon, E. W. Evans, Finnegan, Fridd, Fritzke, , Haderer,
Hamm, Hannifin, Hartung, Hassa, Hodgins, F. Johnson, Thomas John-
son, Johnston, Karel, Kehrein, Kern, La Due, Lang, Lane, Le Roy,
Loebs, Lord, Martin, Miller, Moldenhauer, Morgan, Morris, Osborn, Peter-
son, Rakow, Ray, Reed, Reynolds, Rupp, Sidler, Slade, A. E. Smith. O.
H. Smith, Terens, Thiessenhusen, Thoreson, Thompson, Timlin, Valen-
tine, Waterman, Westfahl, White, Whitson, Williams and Willott — 67.

Nays — Messrs. Ainsworth, Andrew, Bartlett, Braddock, Chandler,
Dahl, Doolittle, Douglas, Ekern, Evans D. Jr., Frear, Oilman, Irvine,
Johnson (Henry), Kimball, Koch, Potter, Rank], Root, Smalley, Smelker,
Stevens, Tarrell, Verbeck and Mr. Speaker — 25.

Paired — Mr. Carberry for indefinite postponement, Mr. Strong
against; Mr. Walrich for; Mr. Beedle against — 4.

Absent or not voting — Messrs. Brittan, Kinney, Price, and Szy-
marek — 4.

This closed the first battle and left an issue with which Gov.
La Folleite could go into the next campaign, of which he availed
himself. It will be noticed that of the eleven committeemen who
reported the bill, eight favored it when it came up for final dis-
posal, two voted against it, and one Assemblyman Kinney, did not
vote. The two who opposed it were Messrs. Benson and Reed;
those who favored it were Messrs. Ainsworth, Braddock, Beedle,
Frear, Gilman, Irvine, Stevens, and Tarrell.

Railway Regulation. 227

CHAPTBE IX.
The Beginning of the End.

Following the adjournment of the legislature on May 33, Gov.
La Pollette made preparation for beginning the next campaign
immediately. Since the first election of Gov. La Follette Wiscon-
sin citizens have had no occasion to complain of apathy on the part
of politicians. There have been no "off years" in this state polit-
ically, for a perpetual campaign has been in progress except dur-
ing the summer and autumn of 1901 when the governor was too
ill to engage in work of that kind. While he remained in the state
he kept the pot boiling. Before he transferred his person and ac-
tivities to Washington and gave his summers- to the lecture plat-
form he succeeded in securing the enactment of the primary elec-
tion law. As a result of that law the office seeker is always busy.

As has been said, the governor prepared to begin his next cam-
paign immediately after the adjournment of the legislature in
May, 1903. He rearranged the figures he had used in his two mes-
sages in order to give them local application and took the. stump
in the fall. He went from town to town, from county fair to
county fair, and on each occasion he demonstrated mathematically
that the people of the particular city or county in which he was
speaking were being robbed by the railroads. He showed how the
state was paying millions of tribute to the greedy corporations
and explained that the only way of abolishing the alleged evil of
which he complained was to adopt the Iowa distance tariff system.

All the figures he had used in his argument had been refuted.
The figures he quoted, prepared by his official statistician for the
purposes and uses to which he was putting them, had been shown
to be inaccurate and misleading — ^that they were, in fact, of no
value ; that the comparison he was drawing between the state that
had honored him by elevating him to the highest position in the
gift of the people and other states were false and calculated to work
injury to his own state. He ignored all the proofs that had been
presented showing his figures unreliable.

As a counter movement the conservatives undertook to secure
the publication, in the state press, of facts and figures that would
refute the arguments of the governor, and prove that his rate quo-
tations were misleading. In all sections of the state the newspa-
pers printed the published rates actually charged for carrying
freight from the local points to market, or to distributing centers,
and compared them with the distance tariffs of Iowa for like dis-
tances. It was shown that in almost every instance the Wisconsin
rates were lower than those of Iowa and Illinois.

But he was renominated at the gymnasium convention at Madi-
son and- re-elected in November, 1904. In order to secure his dec-

228 PoLiTicAx Refobm in Wisconsin.

tion he promised the farmers of- the state that he would reduce
their living expenses by reducing the freight charges they were
forced to pay on everything they consumed and on everything they
produced if they would give him another terni in the office of
governor. He even figured how much he would save per capita to
the people of the state by his distance tariff system of rates. Bach
head of a family was to be benefited to the extent of about $39 an-
nually by the proposed change. And there were many who believed
him competent to work the miracle promised.

"When the legislature met in the winter of 1905 Gov. La Fol-
lette renewed his fight for the adoption of the Iowa distance tariff,
but he was not in as favorable a position to carry his point as he
had been two years before. In 1903 he had a legislative committee
on railroads that would carry out his program to the letter. In
1905 the matter was taken up by the senate committee, a body
that was disposed to do some investigating and thinking on its
own account. Senator W. H. Hatton, an administration man,
was chairman of the committee and he had as associates Senators
Erear, Munson, Hudnall, Beach, Wipperman, Johnson, Morris, and
Merton.

The assembly committee on railroads was made up, as its pre-
decessor had been, of men who would do as the governor ordered.
They were Messrs. Braddock, chairman; Stevens, Irvine, Thayer,
Winch, Powell, Oltman, McKenziej Metzler, and Fred Peterson.

As a starting point, "something to chew on," a bill was intro-
duced in both houses early in the session, on Feb. 10, No. 268S,
and No. 444A. These bills met the governor's approval as they
were merely copies of the Texas law. Gov. La Pollette already had
announced that something of the kind must be enacted into law.
In his usual dogmatic way he said that the whole controversy had
been settled at the polls. To quote from his message :

"If any question can be definitely settled by the people of a state,
the people of Wisconsin have settled the question that railway service
and railway rates shall be controlled by a railway commission, in so far
as the same are subject to state control under the constitution. The
issue was presented for their consideration in terms that could not be
misunderstood or misrepresented. Throughout a protracted campaign it
claimed paramount attention. Its discussion was strongly demanded
by the voters of every section of the state, to the subordination of all
other questions, even those pertaining to national government In so
far, then, as it is possible in a democracy, we assemble this time, under
instructions of those who sent us here to execute their commands."

The only limit he set on the discretion of the legislature in fram-
ing the proposed law was the one laid down by the constitution.
He even spoke regretfully of the repeal of the historic Potter law
in 1876, for he refered to that law as a 'Tjreaking away of Wiscon-
sin from railroad control."

The assembly appeared to take the tentative bills introduced

Railway Ueoulation. 229

on Feb. 10 seriously, as it made a few amendments, suggested by
the committee that originally introduced it, and passed it on April
18 by a vote of 75 to 12, there' being thirteen absentees. The mem-
bers who voted against the measure were Assemblymen Barker,
Brooks, Everett, Hansen, Frank Johnson, Miller, Norcross, Page,
Eacek, Eamsey, Eeynolds, and Szymarek. The seventy-five
"Bobites" thought they were doing right, probably, but they were
counting on men in the senate who were too wise to follow their
lead. The senate nonconcurred in the action of the assembly on
bill No. 444:A on May 25, Senator Hatton making the motion.

280 PouTicAi Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE X.
The Railway Commission Law Enacted.

The real work of perfecting the Wisconsin railway commission
law was performed by the senate committee on railroads with what
outside assistance they could call to their aid. Senator Hatton,
chairman of the committee took the lead in the work, and the law
was given his name, but he was merely the leader, not the author
of the measure, which was the result of the labors of many men.

Of the members of the committee Senators Otis Johnson and
Z. P. Beach were conservatives. Senators Herman Wipperman and
George B. Hudnall were at the time "near half breeds," but the for-
mer had been disciplined in 1903 for alleged gross and unbecom-
ing independence of opinion, and the latter was already drifting
away from the straight and narrow path of implicit faith in and
absolute obedience to the governor. They were therefore, no long-
er to be relied upon to follow out the personal La PoUette program.
Senators Frear, Munson, and Morris were administration men,
and Senator Merton was a democrat who was something of a re-
former on his own account. It must be said, however, that Senator
Merton acted with a majority of the committee in their efforts to
frame a workable statute, and that he supported the measure final-
ly drawn, although ill health made it impossible for him to be pre-
sent when the final vote was taken.

Of Senator Hatton's position there can be no reasonable doubt.
Although he always had been and still was an administration sup-
porter, the chairman of the committee did not at any time believe
in the doctrine preached by Gov. La PoUette on the railway rate
question. How he managed to avoid being drummed out of the
camp is a mystery, but that he did succeed in retaining his place
in the councils of the governor while pursuing a course that was,
in fact, if not openly and contumaciously, in antagonism to La
Pollette's wishes and purposes is a fact of history that can not
successfully be disputed. The governor considered the question
settled. He made that announcement in his biennial message.
His understanding of the situation was that the people of Wis-
consin wanted something like the Iowa and Texas laws — a com->
posite of the two would satisfy him.

But Senator Hatton was of a different opinion. In a subsequent
interview he explained that when he first took up the consideration
of the question of railroad regulation he made it a point to talk
to every man from whom he believed he could gather information
of value, and he also consulted published works on both sides of
the subjects. He read the laws of other states, digested them, and
finally came to the conclusion that none of them were entirely satis-
factory to him as they were not based on correct principles. His

Railway Regulation. 231

main objection to the laws then in force was that they all gave to
the commissions the power to make and promulgate rates. He
believed, he said, that the three things that should be sought in
framing a measure of the kind under consideration were "ade-
quate service, reasonable rates, and no unjust discrimination." It
will be noticed that these were the principles for which the con-
servatives were contending.

In arriving at this conclusion Senator Hatton stated that he
was aided by professors of the state university, by large shippers,
and by other members of the legislature who had given the subject
intelligent study. Members of the committee with whom he con-
sulted daily also contributed valuable ideas on the subject.
< ■ The first bill introduced, he explained in the interview, was
merely a "dummy," designed to occupy the attention of the rank
and file of the legislators while the committee was working out the
problem. The first committee substitute was little better than the
original "dummy," as it was merely a modification of the Texas
law which had first been introduced. All the time the committee
had. in its possession the bill that finally appeared on the calendar
as committee substitute No. 2.

Meanwhile, Senator A. L. Ereutzer and Senator W. C. North
had introduced substitute bills which were decided improvements
on the committee bill. Senator Kreutzer's measure was the result
of exhaustive investigations, in which he was aided by the best le-
gal talent at his home city, Wausau, as well as large shippers who,
by years of experience in dealing with the transportation compan-
ies, had formed opinions concerning the existing laws and believed
they knew where they should be strengthened. Senator North's
bill was what had come to be known as "the stalwart bill." In its
construction had been put the best" thought and work of lawyers,
shippers, and railroad traffic men, all of whom had technical
knowledge of the business to be regulated and were in a position
to speak with authority on the subject.

AH of these measures were referred to the committee, and, with
the several bills before them, the members of that body were in a
position to take the best features from each and construct a good
measure. And this is precisely what they did. One of the hard-
est workers on the committee was Senator Otis Johnson, the un-
wavering "stalwart," and Senator Beach was equally determined
to arrive at a sound conclusion. Either would have preferred the
regular stalwart bill, but both knew the other members of the com-
mittee would never consent ,to report a measure emanating from
that source, and they contented themselves^ with attempting to in-
troduce as many of the conservative provisions into the committee
bill as possible.

During the last days of conference of the committee they even
called to their aid Burton Hansen, general solicitor of the Chicago,

232 ■ Political Reform in Wisconsin.

Milwaukee and St. Paul railroad company. Bach afternoon and
evening for weeks Mr. Hanson met and labored with the committee
to perfect the measure that was to be presented to the senate as
the final, finished work of that body. The result was a good,
wholesome measure, one that could have been improved in some re-
spects, it is true, but for all that a bill that could be described as
sane, safe, and calculated to accomplish the purposes for which it
was designed. ' There were several criticisms of the bill made by
conservatives when it was finally presented and these were made
matters of record, but the objections were not fatal.

The first senate committee "dummy" bill was introduced Feb.
10 (Senate Journal, page 285). The Kreutzer bill was introduc-
ed March 3' ( S. J., page 404) . The second committee bill came in
on May 5 (S. J., page 974), and the North bill followed on May
8 (S. J., page 977). Finnally the second committee substitute,
the one that had been in progress of incubation all wiater was in-
troduced on May 16 by the chairman. Senator Hatton.

The same day that the bill appeared from the committee room
into the bright light of the senate chamber two amendments were
offered, one by Senator Stevens and the other by Senator Eummel.
Both amendments were designed to change the method of making
up the commission, as they provided for an elective rather than
an appointive body. On motion of Senator Hatton the bills and
amendments were rereferred to the committee. (S. J.,. page 1068).
On the same day, at the evening session, the committee again
reported the bill without change and recommended its passage (S.
J., page 1070), and it was made a special order for 10 o'clock on
May 18.

When it came up under special order the forenoon session was
consumed in consideration of the bill and in the disposal of a num-
ber of proposed minor amendments and final action was postponed
until the afternoon session.

It was at this session that Senator Whitehead presented the
eleven conservative amendments, all designed to strengthen, rather
than weaken, the measure and which were all voted down by the
majority. The vote on these amendments varied from 5 against
36 to 10 against, 31, the smaller number being the affirmative con-
servative vote in each case. In no case did the conservative mem-
bers of the committee support the proposed amendments, as the
committee remained unanimous for the bill during the entire ses-
sion. The highest number to vote for an amendment was on the
first of the eleven amendments offered by Senator Whitehead.
They were Senators Hagemeister, Kreutzer, North, Eandolph,
Rogers, Eoehr, Smith, Whitehead, WolfE and Wright. On amend-
ment No. 5 the only members voting affirmatively were Senators
North, Smith, Whitehead, Wolff and Wright.

At the evening session on the same day the bill was put on its

Railway Regulation. 233

passage and received the unanimous vote of the senate, thirty-one
senators voting yea. Senator Merton, a member of the committee
who had aided in framing the bill, was prevented by illness from
attending the session, but he had previously inserted in the record
an announcement that he favored the measure and, were he able
to be present, would have voted for its passage. There was one va-
cancy, Senator Barney Eaton having retired from that body.

This ended the contest over the railroad rate regulation issue.
When the bill came up in the assembly the members of that body,
having learned of the fate of their own measure, surrendered to
circumstances and concurred. The governor attached his signa-
ture and the Wisconsin railroad commission law was written into
the statutes of the state.

234 Political Refobm in Wisconsin.

CHAPTER XI.
The Commission and Its Duties.

Chapter 362, laws of 1905, establishing the Wisconsin railroad
commission, provided for the appointment by the governor of three
members of such commission, the appointments to be confirmed
by the senate. Prom the beginning there had been more or less op- -
position to the creation of an appointive commission, the fear be-
ing freely expressed that Gov. La Follette — who had in the mean-
time been elected to the United States senate in place of Senator
Joseph V. Quarles, and who had been holding back his ac-
ceptance of the office until he could clear his desk of important
matters demanding his attention — ^would avail himself of the op-
portunity to appoint men to the new positions whose main qualifi-
cations in his eyes would be disqualifications in the opinions of the
objectors.

A political commission was not desired by any large number of
citizens and many of the men who had consistently supported the
governor during his entire service in that position so far as their
judgment would permit were unalterably opposed to_ such a body.
Stalwart members and administration men like Senators Stout,
Hatton, Hudnall, Wipperman, Bird, and others insisted that only
such "men be appointed to places on the commission as were quali-
fied by character, mental endowments and training for the duties
that would be required of them.

While the bill was still pending before the legislature and after
it had been enacted into law, several names of probable or possible
appointees were mentioned that were not favorably received by a
majority of the senate. As there is no disposition to establish a
"black list" as a part of this review it is unnecessary to enumerate
the names of those who were supposed at the time to be favored
by Gov. La Pollette for advancement to the new positions and who
were not satisfactory to the senate. It is even impossible to prove
that Gov. La Follette ever personally suggested any of the objec-
tionable names, but when the suggestions came to the members of
the senate whose support would be required before confirmation
could be assured, they had all the appearance of "feelers."

Finally three names appeared among the suggestions that were
entirely satisfactory to all members of the senate and Gov. La Fol-
lette sent them in. They were immediately confirmed and the first
commission was ready for work with John Barnes of Rhinelander
— now a member of the Supreme court of the state — B. H. Meyer,
professor of political economy of the University of Wisconsin, and
Halford Erickson, state commissioner of labor and industrial sta-
tistics, as members. Mr. Barnes was a democrat, his two associates
being republicans. None of these appointments CPnW be said tg be

Railway Regulation. 235

political with the possible exception of that of Mr. Erickson, and
he hfad served in the official family of the governor since the latter
had assumed office in 1901. But Mr. Erickson was a skilled statis-
tician, had given months to the study of railroad rates, and it was
believed his experience would serve as a justification for his ap-
pointment.

Since the organization of the Wisconsin railroad commission the
jurisdiction of that body has been enlarged and the scope of its
operations greatly increased by* a number of acts. The session of
the legislature in 1907, facetiously termed "the long parliament"
by some, enacted a number of statutes by which practically all the
quasi-public corporations were placed under the supervision of the
commission, and assigning to the commission new duties. It is
unnecessary here to do little more than enumerate some of these
acts, as a brief general explanation of the purposes of each will
serve.

The most important measure approved by that legislature was
the one since known as the "public utilities law," chapter 499, laws
of 1907. This measure placed under the jurisdiction of the com-
mission all companies furnishing to the public water, gas, elec-
tricity, heat and telephone service. It subjected these companies
to control similar to that exercised by the commission over rail-
roads. Other laws enacted during the same session may be enu-
merated as follows :

Chapter 576, laws of 1907, provides that no railroad or other
public service corporation shall issue stocks or bonds without first
applying to, and receiving from, the commission authority to
do so.

Chapter 454, laws of 1907, provides that no railroad company
shall begin the construction of a new line or an extension without
first securing from the commission a certificate of necessity and
convenience. This law is designed to protect railroads already in
the field, or in course of construction, from unjust and unnecessary
competition.

Chapter 575, laws of 1907, provides for an eight hour day for
railway telegraph operators, and makes it unlawful for any com-
pany to require or permit its operators to work more than eight
consecutive hours, a period of sixteen hours intervening between
the shifts. This was, and is an unnecessary and harmful law.

Chfipter 247, laws of 1907, designed to enable cities of the
first-class (Milwaukee) to acquire, own and operate railway ter-
minals, and to lease such terminals to railroads desiring to use
them. In this instance the commission is to come in as arbitrator
should the city and railroad company fail to agree as to the terms

of the lease.

Chapter 614, laws of 1907, requires railroads to furnish rea-

236 Political Refokm in Wisconsin.

sonably adequate telephonic communieatioii with its offices, build-
ings, and grounds.

Chapter 352, laws of 1907, requires the railroads of the state
to provide reasonably adequate spur tracks to manufacturing es-
tablishments when imperatively necessary for the operation of
such enterprises or industries.

Chapter 578, laws of 1907, provides for an indeterminate street
railway franchise in cities.

" Chapter 291, laws of 1907, regulates the stringing of electric
wires over railroad tracks.

Chapter 335, laws of 1907, authorizes the Wisconsin Eiver Im-
provement company to construct and maintain a system of water
reservoirs on the tributaries of the Wisconsin river, and to lease
water power and to receive therefor a net revenue not to exceed
6 per cent, the tolls to be fixed semi-annually by the commission.
The company can issue no stocks or bonds without the approval of
the commission, which must ascertain before the approval that
the issue is to be at par, and in consideration of cash, labor or
property at its true money value actually received by the company.

Chapter 654, laws of i907, is the "2 cent passenger fare law."
It should be explained that this law was enacted in the face of an
opinion formally delivered by the Wisconsin railway commission
to the effect that a reduction from 3 to 3 cents per mile for pas-
senger fares was not justified by conditions. The commission
explained its position at leiigth and suggested that a reduction to
2 1-2 cents would be fair and reasonable in the circumstances.

Members of the legislature thought otherwise and organized to
push the 2 cent fare bill through under the leadership of Gov. J. 0.
Davidson and Lieut. Gov. W. D. Connor. It is probable that the
bill would have been defeated had not the lieutenant governor
labored strenuously for its passage. As it was it was once indefi-
nitely postponed in the senate and was only saved by Senator
James A. Wright, who moved a reconsideration at the psycho-
logical moment, carried his point, and secured favorable action on
the bill by the senate. It is a matter of record that all of the "Bob-
ites" in both houses opposed the measure while the Davidson-Con-
nor men supported and passed it.

The published reports of the Wisconsin railroad commission in-
dicate that that body has been busy since it was created, as may
well be judged from the number and variety of its duties under
the -numerous statutes. It has employed a large, force of assist-
ants, experts and others, and has made an honest effort to render
efficient and valuable services to the state.

The commission has not attempted to make sweeping reduc-
tions in freight rates. It has heard complaints whenever they were
presented and ordered hearings in cases that could not be adjusted
without formal proceedings. No citizen who has had a just cause

Railway Regulation. 237

of complaint has been dismissed without a full and fair considera-
tion of his case. Not only have complaints against the railroads
and other quasi-public corporations been submitted to and deter-
mined by the commission, but the public utility companies them-
selves frequently have appealed to that body for the privilege of
changing their schedules of charges for services rendered.

The reason the commission did not cut and slash freight rates
as many people were led to believe they would do, was because they
found the system already established admirably adapted to the«
needs of traffic. The system of commodity and zone rates in force
was not an arbitrary creation of the railroad traffic men. Ship-
pers and carriers had co-operated in perfecting that system, their
mutual experience and the requirements of commerce being de-
termining factors in their negotiations. AVhile it is true these
rates at times were discriminatory with respect to places, such
discriminations as were practiced are imperatively necessary to
the growth of industries and the development of natural re-
sources. Wisconsin can not claim to have a perfect system of
freight rates, but the glaring inequalities and iniquitous extortions
pictured by Gov. La Pollette in 1903 and 1904 proved to be myths.
They simply had no existence in reality.

It is a significant fact that Halford Eriekson, the man who
prepared many of the tables used by Gov. La FoUette in his public
addresses and his messages to the legislature (see governors' mes-
sage. Assembly Journal, 1903, page 50, second paragraph) is now
and has' been from the first a member of the Wisconsin railroad
commission. Had it been true that Wisconsin producers were
paying from 15 to 70 per cent more for freight carrying than the
producers of Iowa (governor's message, 1903, A. J., page 50) is it
reasonable to suppose the shippers would not be aware of the fact
and that they would not complain to the commission; of which Hal-
ford Eriekson, the governor's statistician, is a member? Is it
reasonable to suppose, further, that Mr. Eriekson himself, knowing
of the statements made by the governor in his messages, would not
have taken steps to have the necessary complaints filed had those
statements been based on facts ? Gov. La FoUette alleged that the
average freight rates in Wisconsin were "a fraction less than 40
.per cent higher" than Iowa rates (Assembly Journal, 1903, page
50). Bates have not been materially lowered since that time be-
cause the statements made by the governor were untrue in sub-
stance and in detail and no sweeping reductions were demanded or
justified by conditions. It is true that some reductions have been
made from time to time to meet the requirements of traffic. That,
however, always has been the practice. Since the first railroad was
built in this country the tendency of freight rates has been down-
ward.

Wisconsin is a marvelously prosperous state with diversified

238 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

industries and it was a prosperous state when Gov. La Follette
was working to revolutionize the freight rate systein. This "broad
and pulsing movement of energy," as W. D. Hoard described the
industrial situation in 1903, remains unchanged. The freight
rate system remains unchanged, also, except that the carriers as a
rule deal with the people through a railroad commission. Fortu-
nately that commission has been wise enough, has had sufficient
common sense and economic learning, to refrain from overturning
or attempting to overturn a system that was a growth, a develop-
ment, the outcome of years of negotiation, adjustment, and a due
consideration of mutual interests and the laws of commerce.

But this is not what was promised to the people of Wisconsin
by Gov. La Follette when he was conducting his "progressive"
campaign. It is well that it is so. Had he succeeded in carrying
out his program the "broad and pulsing movement of energy"
would have been dealt a blow from which it would not soon, have
recovered.

Railway REOTJLATieN. 239

CHAPTBE XII.

Railway Eegulation in General.

As has been shown, Wisconsin has passed through a period of
agitation which culminated in an attempt to take the entire man-
agement of the business of railroad corporations out of the hands
of the officers elected by the stockholders. The attempt failed.
The plan that was adopted as a substitute for the one proposed has
much to recommend it, albeit it has the disadvantage of shifting
the responsibility for freight rates and railroad service from the
railroad companies to the commission. Under the old system each
shipper dealt directly with the officers of the carrier. When he had
a complaint to make concerning either the service furnished or the
rates charged, he went directly to the company and presented his
arguments.

Under the new system the state to a large extent has been sub-
stituted for the carrier and negotiations for rate adjustments, for
adequate service, and the establishment of new rates for the pur-
pose of encouraging development of natural resources, however
extensive, are conducted through the commission. Under the old
system all business was transacted between the two parties inter-
ested ; under the present system a third party intervenes. The car-
rier must now satisfy the commission ; the shipper must go to the
commission when he is dissatisfied. Formerly the carriers had
thousands of individual shippers to deal with and they assumed
full and complete responsibility for every rate, every service, and
every act of every employe. Now much if not all of that responsi-
bility is transferred to the shoulders of the commission.

This is the policy that has been adopted in nearly all of the
states of the union and by the congress of the United States. It
is the result of agitation and an attempt to cure abuses that needed
treatment. Eailroad corporations and their methods of dealing
with the public have been more widely discussed and more severely
criticised than any other industry or class of property, particularly
within the last ten years. The searchlight has been turned upon
every detail of their business. Nothing has escaped the eyes of
the investigators and the dusty records of the past have been un-
covered and publicly discussed. Some criticisms were justified by
the conditions disclosed. Practices which no business man would
excuse — ^which no man ever attempted to excuse or paliate —
were brought to light. Secret rates, rebates, and unjust discrimi-
nations wer« alleged in some cases and proved beyond question,
and steps were taken promptly to find a remedy and apply it—
frequently to the lasting satisfaction and profit of the parties most
severely criticised, the railroad corporations.

This period of agitation has opened the door to the class of

240 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

public men who keep their ears to the groimd and govern their
actions by what they hear. These are the statesmen who ride upon
the crest of the wave of public opinion. They feel the public pulse
and in their zeal to outbid each other for popularity they seize
upon every opening for criticism, every opportunity to foster pre-
judice and passion, every device by which obstacles to their own
personal advancement may be torn down and removed from their
path.

It is to this element that the people of the nation owe much of
the intemperate, destructive criticism of railroad corporations that
has characterized the last decade. It is a serious matter when any
industry or business that depends wholly upon the public favor
for its life loses the confidence of the public, and this is peculiarly
true of the railroads, because no other form of property is so easily
reached by legislatures. The fact that the railroads have with-
stood the attack without demoralization is a splendid indorsement
of their stability. It is doubtful whether any other industry, not
excepting the banks and other financial institutions of the country,
strong as they are, could have lived through the storm of criticism
to which the railroads have been subjected.

It is to be regretted that public men and that portion of the
press that assumes the responsibility of shaping public opinion
upon great questions affecting the public weal do not always treat
important subjects fairly. Political expediency receives too much
consideration at times for the public good. It is not merely a
question of how unwise laws may affect a corporation and its
stockholders. It goes further than that. The people, the men
who ship the freight, the producers and consumers, are equally
interested. Production fails of its purpose if the goods are not de-
livered to the consumer. We shall not succeed industrially unless
the entire machinery of production and distribution work harmo-
niously. Transportation must adjust itself to the needs of traffic
or the traffic will not move. Unwise legislation affecting our
transportation lines may destroy our commerce just as effectively
and completely as privateering upon the high seas. It is impor-
tant, therefore, that the people of this country learn' caution in
dealing with intricate matters of business while providing for the
protection of their own interests.

To some extent at least the railroad companies are them-
selves responsible for the' mistrust that political agitators have
been able to create against them. They have not made it a practice
to take the people into their confidence as much as they should
have done. When they were attacked the rank and file of* the
citizenry knew but, little about the railroad business. The economic
principles which should, and to a large extent do, govern railroad
rate making were entirely unknown to a substantial majority of
the voters. The railroad companies looked "big rich" and were

Railway Regulation. 241

constantly suspected of making too much money, more than they
had a right to make.

Here in Wisconsin Gov. La FoUette attacked the railroads
with the general statement that their rates were all too high. It
was a simple statement, one that could be readily grasped and
mastered, and it had the advantage of precise alignment with a
too prevalent popular prejudice. When he backed his statement
with a few skillfully prepared tables of comparative rates, many
people believed he had revealed to them a systematic and colossal
robbery of which they were the innocent victims. It required only
five words to say, "Their rates are too high," and it placed the
burden of proof on the accused corporations. When the defendants
undertook to explain and justify the thousands of rates in effect
at the time in this state it required volumes, and much of the mat-
ter contained in the answer was not easily understood by men
unfamiliar with transportation matters. The people had not been
educated in the elements of rate making and the time given to
convince them that the governors' figures. were misleading was all
too short. If the railroad companies had previously given greater
publicity to their business methods the impeachment filed against
them in 1904 would not have deceived so many citizens. But,
late as their defense was begun, it was sufficient to save Wisconsin
from some of the mistakes made by several less conservative states.

There is still another phase of the anti-railroad agitation that
deserves mention here. The statement that secret rebates were
being paid, or had been paid, to favored shippers was urged by po-
litical speakers and the anti-railroad press as a stock argument in
favor of the creation of a commission armed with the rate making
power, when in fact this feature of the problem of railroad rate
regulation had no legitimate place in the discussion. To make a
rate is one thing ; to maintain it is another. When the government
steps in to take charge of rate making it must deal with all the
intricate questions that affect traffic. When it forbids secret re^
bating it merely enacts a statute making it a crime for carriers
to accept less than the published tariff rates. No commission is
required to enforce that law. Grand juries and the courts may
be relied upon to see that the law is respected. The fact is that
commissions have been of very little service in enforcing the main-
tenance of rates. Nor was the law applying to this branch of the
government's work of regulation materially strengthened by any
statute enacted since the passage of the Elkins act of 1903. Prac-
tically all the railroad prosecutions during the Eoosevelt admin-
istration, about which so much has been said and written, were
based on the Elkins act. >

It can not truthfully be denied that, during the period of agi-
tation that appears now to be subsiding, the public mind was thor-
oughly aroused. Public opinion was based upon an immense

242 PoLiTioAi. Refokm in Wisconsin.

amount of misinformatioii like that doled oVTt to the jjeople oi
Wisconsin in 1903 and 1904, and it is not surprising that there
was a strong sentiment in favor of radical changes among the
masses of the people who did not have direct business relations
with the transportation companies. In their response to what was,
let it be hoped, a temporary sentiment, legislators in many in-
stances have gone too far for the public good. It was right to cor-
rect whatever evils existed in 'the transportation system; it was
right to prevent by law combinations against the best interests of
the people; it was right to do away with personal discriminations.
The railways are the highways of commerce and should be open
upon like terms to all doing business under like conditions. The
railroad rate schedule^ should be an open book. Every shipper
has a right to know what his neighbor or competitor is paying.
But to put the rate making power absolutely in the hands of com-
missions created by law and close the door of the railway offices
to thepublic was unnecessary and unwise.

Every shipper- knows that freight rates must adjust themselves
to ever changing business conditions. The response to a demand
for readjustment to fit new conditions must be prompt, more
prompt than' is possible in dealing with a governmental bureau
bound in red tape. However, right or wrong, the new scheme,
which in its present form is nothing more nor less than the product
of political agitation, has been put in operation. Practically all
the states in the union have created railroad commissions clothed
with unlimited authority and armed with plenary power over the
carriers, and the interstate commerce commission has complete
control over interstate traffic.

Under the new system the responsibility for the successful
operation of the railway lines and the development of new traffic no
longer rests upon the shoulders of the officers elected by the stock-
holders. By placing the rate making power in the hands of gov-
ernmental commissions that responsibility has been shifted to the
government itself. The shipper and the stockholder- must rely
upon the same legally constituted authority, one for relief from
excessive charges and the other for dividends upon his stock. It
will require a wise — ^sjipernaturally wise — government to satisfy
either.

The new system, also, will prove a disappointment to the people
who are indirectly responsible for its "adoption, because it is not
responsive to the needs of commerce and because it will not produce
what was expected of it — a lower level of rates. Some states have
caused a deal of trouble for the railroads without accomplishing
any corresponding benefit to the public. The interstate commerce
commission, as now constituted, will not be able to supervise
interstate rates successfully because the task is too big for it.
Partial supervision, like everything that is only half done, will

Railway Regulation. 248

not produce satisfactory results, and it is now a physical impossi-
bility for the federal commission to even half do the work of super-
vision assigned to it by congress.

If the government is determined to persist in the policy of
exercising the authority over common carriers to the extent of
fixing freight rates, rules and regulations which can not be changed
except by the same authority, justice to the public in whose behalf
the power is invoked demands that legislative bodies, particularly
congress, shall establish a system of control that shall be so ade-
quate and flexible as to be promptly responsive to the needs of com-
merce while giving due regard to the rights and interests of the
carriers.

But the governments, state and national, will experience some
diificulty in providing a bureau competent to do this work as it
should be done. The railroads of the country employ approxi-
mately 10,000 men in their trafiic departments and these men do
not work under an eight hour system. Included in this number
are vice presidents, traffic managers, general freight and passenger
agents and their assistants, and traveling agents. These men are
paid salaries and they are expected to earn the money they receive:
They are on the ground, at the place where the business is trans-
acted, and they are in touch with the patrons of the roads who
furnish the tonnage that keeps the traias moving. They are at
all times intimately and personally acquainted with the business,
its needs, its possibilities of betterment, and they are expected to
know and do know what must be done to develop new business
along their lines.

The interstate commerce commission as it is today organized,
is made up of seven men, all finite beings with limited capacity,
both physically and intellectually. They alone have a right to
hear a complaint, make an order affecting a rate, and to legalize
every rate promulgated. To be effective and useful to the people,
it is necessary for them to have in their possession all the informa-
tion regarding traffic possessed by a railroad force of 10,000 men.
As government bureaus are run in Washington, how many rate
makers would be required adequately to do the traffic business for
all the roads in the country ?

The federal government and many of the states have under-
taken too much or done too little. They have gene too far or not
far enough. They have given to governmental bodies the rate
making power and they have not created the machinery to ade-
quately perform for the roads the service which they have under-
taken. There is reason to doubt the ability of the government to
create and organize such a bureau, and, in the event of such failure,
the door should once more be opened wide for negotiations between
the carriers and their patrons with the responsibility for adequate

244 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

service and reasonable rates placed where it rightfully belongs —
upon the shoulders of the transportation officers.

In doing this no opening should be left for a return to practices
that are, by common consent, unjust, oppressive, and destructive
of legitimate competition in their tendency. Eebates, secret rates,
and unjust personal discriminations should be strictly prohibited
and, when practiced in defiance of law, should be visited with se-
vere punishment. When this is done the requirements of com-
merce are met. Until we shall determine to change our form of
government, if that time evej* comes, the more freedom we give for
the natural laws of trade to operate in their own way the better
it will be for the country. Business cannot thrive under unneces-'
sary and burdensome regulation. Industries conducted by men
of highly developed business instincts and thorough business
training find it difficult to succeed when surrounded and hedged in
by unnatural, arbitrary restrictions. The small manufacturer and
dealer of mediocre mental equipment is uniformly smothered by
them.

Railway Regulation. 245

CHAPTEE XIII.
An Ebb Tide of Settlement.

There is every reason to believe the public will, in time, tire
of the extravagant agitation on the subject of railroad regulation
that has characterized recent years and men will then no longer be
elected to public office upon the simple statement that they are
opposed to the railroads. This subject willbe taken up by the leg-
islatures of the country with a view to solving the problem and"
settling all disputed points in a fair, reasonable, and effective man-
ner. The public deserves to be, and must be, protected. It is
entitled to good service at reasonable rates. From the viewpoint
of the public the public benefit is of first importance; the stock-
holder believes the returns on capital invested is of the greatest
moment. The problem is to reconcile public and private rights
without unduly subordinating the one to the other.

A railroad has a right to charge a rate that will produce enough
to pay its expenses and a fair return upon the value of its prop-
erty. The bond and stock holders who furnish the money to build
the road can not by any rule of justice be deprived of a fair return
on their capital. A rate that is reasonable will produce in the ag-
gregate a fair return upon the investment. Economically, a rail-
road should not charge more; legally, it can not be required to
charge less. The difficulty is in determining just how the expenses
of operation, renewal, and income shall be distributed.

The railroad officers, left to themselves, by giving close atten-
tion to the requirements of the traffic originating on their re-
spective lines, have been able to bring about an adjustment of rates
which meet the requirements of traffic and at the same time pro-
duce sufficient revenue to maintain their properties, and, in many
cases, pay dividends to the investors. They accomplished this be-
cause they had the power of making such charges for their serv-
ices as each commodity would bear. Discriminations between per-
sons was not a necessary factor in this distribution of charges.
Discriminations between places, however, was an absolute necessity,
and it is at this point that the government will fail. Under the
law there can ultimately be no discrimination between places.
Every shipping point will demand that it be accorded every ad-
vantage of geographical location. There is only one form of tariff
which a government can establish and maintain and be a just gov-
ernment, and that is a distance tariff. That such a system would
overturn our industrial and commercial organizations must be con-
ceded.

It is a consideration of these facts that will result in a change
of sentiment on the part of the general public and they are even
now causing fair minded public men who have no interest but

246 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

the public weal at heart to hesitate about following the radical
leaders to the extreme of their demands upon the government for
railroad regulation. The citizens who make up that great mass of
voters called the "plain people" are beginning to learn that they
can not always rely upon the unsupported word of agitators who
want ofSce. The fiiie frenzy with which the office seeking reformer
expounds his belief in the total and inexcusable depravity of promi-
nent men engaged in private business and as officers of large in-
dustrial enterprises, while at the same time his ovm impeccable
purity is implied, does not carry so much weight as formerly. Blind
leaders of the blind never were popular, and once the blindness
of the leader is established, his occupation is gone for all time.

But, even though public sentiment on the subject of unneces-
sarily drastic and obstructive railway regulation is destined to
change, is already changing in fact, there is still need of educative
work on the part of clear sighted, right minded citizens, for the
political agitator, the disturber of the public peace, is always in the
field. Wlien one subject of controversy that permits of the pe-
culiar methods of treatment most dearly loved by the extremist
becomes worn out he turns with cheerful alacrity to another that
will serve his ends. Wisconsin has passed through a succession
of spasms of this character. It started with the primary election,
then shifted to taxation, and wound up with railroad regulation.
Each was used in its turn to convince the people that designing
men had trampled upon their liberties, robbed them of their sub-
stance, and retarded the development of their state.

Wisconsin citizens now know, or ought to know, how much
truth there was in all the lurid campaign literature and still more
fiery campaign oratory indulged in by the self-appointed reformers
of the last decade, but there is always danger of a new reform-
issue becoming popular. In this connection the word "reform"
is used to designate all political movements that are mainly sound
and contain scarcely enough sense to serve as a flavor. The word
has been given this meaning by men who seek political advance-
ment, not because of their recognized ability, not in return for
distinguished public services, not because they love the people with
the consuming passion they simulate, but merely that they may
enjoy the honors and emoluments incidental to public office.

These are the men who preach the doctrine of suspicion and
hate. Confidence inspires confidence ; distrust breeds distrust. The
one leads to fair dealing; the other to wars of extermination. If
politics could be entirely divorced from business it might be well
for the agitators to monopolize that field entirely and hurl the
javelins of mimic rage at each other indefinitely; but, unfortu-
nately, the state and national governments have shown a disposi-
tion of late to do more than merely exercise a supervisory power
over the industrial activities of the country. Thus it has come

^ Railway Regulation. 247

about that governmental policies mean something more than the
protection of the citizen's life and property and the maintenance
of the public peace. They mean a direct, positive, and it may be,
an unwarranted and uncalled for interference with the business
relations of every citizen with his neighbor. Under these condi-
tions it is not safe to surrender the political field entirely to the
self-seeking men of political war who shed language instead of
blood in defense of their alleged opinions and only succeed in
poisoning the public mind. Even when they succeed they 'fall, for
they are never able to redeem their promises.

It is not intended here to convey the idea that it is better to
meekly submit to wrongs than to take up arms against them. Where
the wrongs are real they should be met with telling protests. When
a man has an opinion that is worth defending it is his duty to
defend it in the strongest possible manner. But violence is not a
proof of strength and personal abuse is invariably a demonstration
of weakness; either weakness in the man who is guilty of using
such a weapon or in the cause he represents.

If our form of government shall endure it will not be through
the aid and counsel of men whose sole aim it is to stir up factional
strife, to array one section of the country or one class of citizens
against another. The social democrats are right when they say their
succesg depends upon the awakening of "class consciousness," and
every public man or private citizen who lends his assistance to such
an awakening is contributing to the cause of socialism, it. matters
riot whether that man be a laborer, a millionaire, or a' reform agi-
tator. A war to the finish between social classes spells socialism
in the end, and socialism spells the enslavement of the people to the
government and the establishment of the inost oppressive form of
bureaucracy.

a48 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTEE XIV.
The Opposing Spieits. '

The passion for regulating everything and everybody is born
of the old, unlovely spirit of intolerance against which the Chris-
tian church has been preaching for more than 1900 years and of
which it has too frequently furnished striking examples. In all
that time, and in all the history of the world before the beginning
of the Christian era, it is impossible to find one case where the
spirit of intolerance in active operation has not led to wrong, mis-
ery, oppression, and, in too many cases, to wars and revolutions.
It has overthrown governments. It has dragged martyrs to the
stake, uncrowned kings, sent popes into exile, severed friendships,
broken up homes, driven high minded, able men from public life,
and marked its progress through the ages with blood and tears.

This is not an attractive picture, but it has the merit of being
true to life. But there is another, a brighter side to human nature,
without which there would be no hope for the race. Whether men
acknowledge openly their belief in and veneration for the Golden
Eule, or profess to- sneer at and flippantly misquote it, there is deep
down in the heart of every civilized man a knowledge of the facr
that it embodies the most profound philosophy ever uttered by
human lips, divinely inspired.

The Golden Eule and the spirit of intolerance are at opposite
poles; there is nothing in common between them. One leads to
peace, the other to strife and discord. For this reason the former
is the more practical of the two. From the beginning of time,
while intolerance has been brewing poisons and sharpening swords,
brotherly love has been binding up wounds and wiping away tears.
While intolerance has been sending man against man in the death
grapple, brotherly love has been bridging gulfs and bringing men
together in peace and accord. Of all systems of philosophy the
Golden Eule is the most practical and the best calculated for use
as a law of conduct in the business and political worlds.

Let those who doubt the soundness of this position think for
themselves what would happen if a new and rational reform in
this respect were to be adopted and put into operation by business
men and politicians. There would still be principles of govern-
ment over which parties would contend. There would be compe-
tition in the business world. But there would be no more bitter
personal antagonisms. Men who differed in opinion would not
charge each other with deliberate dishonesty. They would sup-
port their opinions with argument, not personal abuse. They
would not seek to profit by engendering social unrest and class
hatred. In the busings world the rule of toleration would be
equally profitable — as a matter of fact there is more honesty, fair

Railway Regclation. 249

dealing and decency among business and professional men today
than nursers of grouches could be made to believe.

The belief in and advocacy of world wide toleration will be
branded by many as an impractical ideal, a dream, but the man
who believes in and strives to the best of his ability to live up
to that ideal is facing in the right direction. What right has a
man who refuses to subscribe to the doctrine of toleration to call
himself a "progressive?" The man who is inspired by the spirit
of intolerance, who preaches the doctrine of distrust, suspicion,
enmity, hate, has turned his back upon progress and is facing the
dark ages before the birth of civilization.

Nothing here is designed to counsel weakness, surrender to
wrong, or a namby pamby sentimentalism that lacks the back-
bone to stand up for rights. Man may be strong and honest at
the same time. He may put himself and keep himself beyond the
reach of just criticism, where he will have little use for the "short
and ugly word" without the sacrifice of one jot of that virile man-
hood which all the world admires. He may express opinions,
openly and fearlessly, and support them by argument without
branding those who differ with him as fools or knaves. He may do
anything and everything that an honest, fearless, just man can
do under our present democratic form of government. The only
thing he loses is that which no man is willing to acknowledge he
possesses — ^the spirit of intolerance, the right to hate his neighbor,
the right to think and speak evil of all who refuse to accept his
judgment as final.

During all the time the railway rate regulation subject, was be-
fore the legislature of Wisconsin there was one man, not a politician,
whose services were of inestimable value to the people of this state.
He was not a member of the legislature; he held no commission
from the people to protect their interests ; he had no political ambi-
tion, it never having occurred to him to seek official advancement.
He was, in fact, an officer of one of the large railroad corporations.

That man is Burton Hanson, general solicitor for the Chicago,
Milwaukee and St. Paul railroad, and he appeared before the legis-
lature as a representative of that corporation. During practically
the entire season of 1903, and again in 1905, Mr. Hanson re-
mained in Madison and aided by his knowledge of the law and of
the railroad business, first, in defeating the attempt to engraft
upon our system of laws the arbitrary, illogical railway regulation
statutes of Iowa and Texas; and second, in framing a law that has
been pronounced by many practical men the best railroad regula-
tion law in the country.

The two main causes that contributed to the defeat of the bill
presented to the legislature in 1903 as the administration measure
for the regulation of railroads were the address delivered by Mr.
Hanson before the legislative committee on railroads apd the

250 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

meeting of business men and shippers held in Madison to protest
against the enactment of such a radical law. In his address "Mr.
Hanson answered completely the arguments advanced by Gov. La
Follette in support of the bill, and he also demonstrated the inac-
curacy and worthlessness of the figures contained in the governor's
tables, which were advanced as a reason for the passage of the bill.
That address was a model of forceful, but temperate, argument, a
clear statement of facts and figures, and a convincing comparison
of the conditions then obtaining in Wisconsin and neighboring
states with respect to railway transportation. This address, to-
gether with the almost daily advice and counsel given to members
of the legislature and others who were contending against the de--
struction of Wisconsin's commercial and industrial systems, contrib-
uted more to the defeat of the bill than any other one cause.

In 1905 Mr. Hanson again appeared in Madison as the repre-
sentative of the Milwaukee road and again he rendered valuable
services in the cause of the people. He not only aided in the defeat
of the radical assembly bill, but he assisted in framing the measure
that finally was enacted into law. Had he been disposed to play
politics, to engage in sharp practices, he would have contented
himself with assuming an attitude of opposition. He would have
permitted a statute to be enacted that would have been vulnerable,
one he could have taken to the courts and killed there. But when
it was suggested that he adopt this course he replied that his ad-
vice had' been asked and it was his duty to give to the legislative
committee and individual members of the legislature the full bene-
fit of his knowledge of the subject under consideration.

No man in the middle west was better equipped to render val-
uable assistance to the committee than was Burton Hanson. A
man of profound legal knowledge, a specialist in transportation
matters, a clear headed, logical thinker, and a calm, dispassionate
student of industrial conditions and needs, Mr. Hanson was pre-
eminently the man for the occasion. For weeks and months he
counseled with members of the committee individually, and,
finally, he met with the committee as a body daily, and, section by
section, he went over the proposed law with them and suggested
improvements, amendments, additions and eliminations. The re-
sult was a law that could not be attacked in the courts with any
hope of success, a statute, too, that has been commended by econ-
omists, trafiic men and shippers in all parts of the country.

And all this was accomplished without the aid of red fire or
band music. In his quiet, gentlemanly, sincere, unostentatious
manner Mr. Hanson went about the performance of his duties, or
what he considered his duties, without fuss or feather, and he did
unto others as he would have others do unto him. His ripe judg-
ment, the result of years of experience in transportation matters,
his exceptional mental attainments, his knowledge of the principles

Railway Regulation.- 251

of law, all were placed at the disposal of the committee without
reservation of any character.

Burton Hanson is entitled to the gratitude of the people of Wis-
consin for the part he played in the events that led up to the en-
actment of the Wisconsin railroad commission law, and in saying
this no thought of detracting from the credit due to others is en-
tertained. The members of the committee are to be thanked for
the broad minded policy they adopted when they called in this
railroad attorney to aid them in the work committed to them. The
attorneys and trafQe men for the other roads and experienced ship-
pers gave able assistance. But the high minded, unselfish con-
ception of duty which animated Mr. Hanson is an inspiration to
others placed in similar positions that should be kept before the
eyes and in the minds of the people.

262 Political Reform in Wisconsin.

CHAPTBE XV.
In Conclusion.

It has been part of the system adopted by an element of aspiring
politicians in this state in recent years, whenever a man advocates
reason in dealing with corporations and especially railroads, to
point to him as a subservient creature of wealth and. an enemy of
the common people. They act upon the theory that it is easy to
convince a majority of the voters that the people and the corpora-
tions can have no interests in common. Whenever a public man or
a prominent private citizen advocates a course that is practical and
wise, but not in harmony with what they regard as their political
necessities, he is promptly charged with fostering selfish interests
and placed in the so-called favored class. This is done to destroy
his influence writh the mass of the voters. Wisconsin's recent political
history is full of examples of prominent men who have been
maligned and slandered because they had convictions that were in
oppositi9n to the "reform" propaganda, and had the courage to
state them.

How much longer this system can be worked successfully is
problematical. The answer must come from the people. We shall
not expect it until they have learned that the leadership of extrem-
ists is unwise, unsafe, and in the end will be harmful to them.
The people will do well to study the motives of politicians as well
as the measures which they advocate, because if they are not
deceived in the former they will be less apt to be deceived by the
latter.

Professional politicians make it their business to have new issues
to* dangle before the eyes of the people at every election. It serves
the double purpose of directing public attention to them and divert-
ing attention from those issues that have been worn threadbare or
have proven unprofitable and disappointing to the people when put
into operation. A statesman is a leader. A politician is a follower.
A statesman educates public sentiment. A politician trims his sails
to catch every breeze. A statesman studies the principles of gov-
ernment and bases his official acts on his knowledge of those
principles. A politician studies the temper of his constituents and
adjusts his course to popular clamor. A statesman aims to be right.
A ■politician strives to be popular.

"The great difference between the real statesman and the pre-
tender is, that the one sees Into the future, while the other
regards only the present; the one lives by the day, and acts on
expediency; the other acts on enduring principles and for im-
mortality." — Burke.

This review has dealt with three important questions. Each
has occupied the political stage in its time and each has been rep-
resented to the people as a matter of momentous importance, to

Railway Regulation. 253

them. In 1902 the primary election law was presented to the
voters and the finger of scorn was pointed at every man who had
the courage to oppose it. It is now an acknowledged failure. Tax
reform followed. Every man who dared to raise his voice against
the demonstrably unwise schemes advocated by the professional
reformers was promptly and without ceremony represented to the
people as a tax dodger or a tool of corporations. The subject was
carried to a point where there were no more political dividends in
further agitating it and it was then dropped. T'he result is we
have doubled the income of the state but we have not given any
relief to the overburdened taxpayer. The property that carried the
lieaviest load of taxes before the agitation is in most cases paying
more than it ever did before. The railroad rate question has been
fully discussed in this review and requires no further comment. The
unprejudiced reader will hardly be able to avoid the conclusion
that after all there is a wide difference between honest reform for
the improvement of government and the reforms invented to pro-
mote political interests.