their roads built on credit, and to hold the lands, released from the primary mortgages, for speculation. There were abundant innuendoes thrown out in political campaigns that public officials, especially members of legislative bodies, national, state, and municipal, had not been losers by the grants and indulgences showered on the corporations. It is improbable that many individuals were thus persuaded or enriched by large benefactions. When the whole community were ready to grant everything a railroad company could ask, there was little need for “graft.” Chief, however, among all causes of exasperation were the frequent and notorious discriminations in favor of some individuals, industries, and places against others. By the connivance of one or more companies the fuel supply of a city was put into the hands of a single firm or clique. The big shipper generally was conceded a better rate than his small competitors. But it must be said that at terminal points and junctions, where shippers had the choice of two or more lines, they sometimes forced the hungry traffic managers to offer rates by no means agreeable or profitable. When the rate per hundred pounds on merchandise from New York by way of the lakes to St. Paul, including 156 miles of railroad haul, was 35 cents, that from St. Paul to Faribault, 56 miles, was 39 cents. The state constitution contained (and still contains) the provision that all common carriers enjoying right of way for public use shall carry the mineral, agricultural, and other productions of the state “on equal and reasonable terms.” The farmers could not see that a rate on wheat from Owatonna to Winona of 2.6 cents, and one of 6 cents from Rochester, 40 miles on the road nearer Winona, were “equal”; nor could the people of Faribault and vicinity see what justice there was in paying $29.50 freight per carload of lumber from the falls, while residents of Owatonna, 15 miles farther on, should enjoy a rate of $18. As early as 1866, in his inaugural address to the legislature, Governor Marshall had advised that body to be looking out “for the interests of the people against possible oppression from these corporations, which will soon be a power in the land.” In his message of 1867 he suggested that it was time to attach proper terms and conditions to railroad aid. He did not like the withdrawal of ten million acres of land from the operation of the homestead act.