These insidious bribes in the guise of courtesy and honor for position—these free passes which Governor Folk denounces as the first steps to corruption—are prevalent in all our States. Even in honest old Maine, the frosty forest State, I found the railroad pass in full bloom. Speaking to a joint committee of the House and Senate at Augusta a few months ago, I exhibited a number of photographs of passes given to legislators and councilmen by one of our big railroads. The members examined these photos with much interest and some facetious remarks. On the way into town a famous lobbyist who has long and close acquaintance with the legislature of Maine laughed till the tears ran down his cheeks over the memory of the scene, puffing out between his explosions the explanation of his merriment: “Every one of those fellows has a railroad pass in his own pocket.” Inquiry in other directions tends to confirm his statement. It is hardly possible to imagine that the ordinary legislator or judge can be entirely impartial in reference to a railroad bill or suit when he is under obligation to the railroads for past favors and hopes for similar courtesies in the future. When a judge finds that jurors in a railroad case have accepted passes from the railroad he discharges the jurors as unfit for impartial service,[5] yet that same judge may have in his pocket an annual pass over all the lines of the road that is plaintiff or defendant in the case. Some railroad presidents and managers have told me that passes are given as mere courtesies and are not intended to influence the conduct of officials. This may be true in some cases, but as a rule the railroads do not give charity; but expect favor for favor, and value for value, or multiplied value for value. Railroad men have sometimes admitted to me that the psychology of the pass is closely related to that of the bribe, and that they sought and obtained political results from the distribution of transportation favors. And aside from such admissions the evidence on the facts is overwhelming. A prominent judge who had been on the bench for years in one of our best States and had always received passes from various railroad companies, found at the beginning of a new year that one of the principal railroads had failed to send him the customary pass. Thinking it an oversight he called the attention of the railroad’s chief attorney to the fact. “Judge,” said the lawyer, “did you not recently decide an important case against our company?” “And was not my decision in accordance with law and justice?” said the judge. The attorney did not reply to this, but a few days later the judge got his pass. After some months it again became the duty of the judge to render a decision against the company. This second act of judicial independence was not forgiven. The next time he presented his pass the conductor confiscated it in the presence of many passengers and required the judge to pay his fare.