Under our present system, the men who are most able to pay their way on the railroad ride free. The man who is least able to pay, not only has to pay for himself, but in the long run has to pay also for the deadheads who ride free. This will become obvious to anybody who will think about it for a moment. _Sixth._ It would take away the power of the railroads to destroy any individual, any business or any community. It would save the thousands of lives which are now lost every year for lack of double tracks, safety appliances and reasonable hours of labor. It would enable the cotton grower of the South to exchange his products with the corn grower of the West in such a way that the railroad would not get more for hauling the corn than the man who raised it got for it when he sold it. At present the Southern farmer pays seventy-five and eighty cents per bushel, cash, for corn which the farmer of the West sold for thirty-five cents. The transportation companies get the lion’s share of that enormous difference. It would put an end to strikes, and would put into the hands of the people a weapon with which they could destroy any combine among capitalists in any article of commerce. Among other things, it would save the tremendous sum of $65,000,000 which the Federal Government now pays to the railroads every year for the carriage of the mails, and that saving could be applied to extending the Rural Free Delivery to the remotest parts of the country. If the Government owned the railroads and carried its own mails in steel cars, the Post-Office Department would show a profit instead of a loss, and railway mail clerks would be able to insure their lives. At present they cannot insure their lives, for the reason that the Government allows them to be hauled around in flimsy dry-goods boxes, whose cost of construction is less than the annual rent which our Government pays for their use and which invariably get smashed to splinters whenever there is a collision. * * * * * LOCUST GROVE, GA., April 21, 1905. _Hon. Thomas E. Watson, Thomson, Ga._ MY DEAR SIR: As affirmative debaters on the subject: “_Resolved_, That the democratic principles of the United States are in danger of being superseded by those of an aristocracy,” we have secured very valuable help from your articles in the April number of TOM WATSON’S MAGAZINE, and knowing that you, being a student of political economy, could give us some personal suggestions, we would appreciate your sending us material on the subject at our expense. Very respectfully yours, —— ——.