Even this long list does not cover the whole field. The cases on record do not exhaust the possibilities of discriminations. The following bit of testimony shows how easy it is to invent new ways of passing railroad moneys into the treasuries of favored shippers,—ways that would not be interfered with by any law short of public control of the purchase and sale of merchandise. Mr. Gavin, the agent of the Vandalia line, was being examined by the Interstate Commerce Commission in March, 1901. On the question as to how business could be got by giving advantages to shippers without cutting rates Mr. Gavin said: “There is nothing to prevent my going down to the packing-house and paying $10 apiece for hams if I wanted to; if I did not want to cut a rate, there is generally a way out of the hole.” “COMMISSIONER CLEMENTS. A good many ways; and it is your belief that a good many of these have been practised, is it not? “MR. GAVIN. I do not know. I would not like to say. “COMMISSIONER PROUTY. If you bought hams enough at $10 apiece the packing-house could give you the traffic at full rates? “MR. GAVIN. Yes, sir. “COMMISSIONER PROUTY. Have you ever known that to be done? “MR. GAVIN. No, sir; but I say there are lots of ways out of the woods.” Almost everybody agrees, in public, that railway favoritism ought to be stopped.[346] It disturbs the fair distribution of wealth, undermines industrial justice, business morals, and political honesty; builds monopoly; wastes resources, and causes enormous loss to the railroads as well as to the persons and places that are discriminated against. Railway discrimination breaks down the equality of opportunity that is one of the fundamental rights recognized in every country. It tends to separate success from merit and industry, and make it depend on fraud and favoritism. Judge Grosscup touched a vital point when he said to the Boston Economic Club, March 11, 1905: “Any difference in rates permitted by law, even though based on the bulk of the tonnage handled, is a direct and effective blow, by the nation itself, at the principle that every man, whatever his present business size, shall be given equal conditions and equal opportunity.... In this country there is no such thing as size to a business man. The man of little size expects to get big. He has a right to get big. He has a right to have the atmosphere of equal opportunity and equal conditions in which to grow, and excepting, of course, some unit, such as a ton or a car, the charge ought to be the same for the little as for the big shipper.”[347]