* * * * * Well, the railroad rate bill has passed the House, with only seven negative votes—all Republicans. But in the Senate is where the tug-of-war comes.—_Malad (Ida.) People’s Advocate._ * * * * * Pure food is once more an issue in both houses of Congress, and the bill bids fair to be defeated in the Senate, which numbers among its members not a few who have interests in groceries, fisheries, packing and canning houses that will be unfavorably affected by pure food legislation. The clause most necessary to the effectiveness of the bill, the one providing that all packages shall be labeled to show exactly the contents of the package whether medicine, food or beverage, and which enables the purchaser at least to know with what and when he is poisoning himself, is the very clause that seems in greatest danger of defeat.—_Adams (N. Dak.) Budget._ * * * * * And now the assertion comes forth that a large white goat in a New York town by the name of Rockefeller, while the family heads were bowed in sorrow, climbed upon the porch and devoured the wreath of flowers which hung on the door. But, pshaw! that is only characteristic of the name—swiping all in sight.—_Wrens (Ga.) Reporter._ * * * * * It is probable that when the Hepburn railway rate bill gets back to the lower house of Congress that it and its author will scarcely have a bowing acquaintance.—_Glenwood (Mo.) Phonograph._ * * * * * The fight in Congress over the railway rate bill seems to center on court review of the orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Now the courts have the right under the Constitution to review all orders of the commission or they have not. Therefore why should the fight be over this feature of the bill unless the railroads believe that the courts have had this authority if denied in the measure, we are unable to comprehend. On the first blush we should say that the courts, if asked, would have this right, for they have claimed the right to review almost any and every thing till the Democratic Party was forced to denounce “government by injunction.” Still, the railroads occupy a peculiar position toward the people of the country. The stockholders in a railroad corporation have not the same rights the stockholders have in nearly every other corporate body. The railroads have been permitted to condemn our land for their use, but in so doing they incurred certain responsibilities to the public that are imposed on no other corporation. It would therefore seem but just that if railroads can force us to part with our real estate, surely we, the people, have a right to say that these roads shall be managed just as the people through their representatives in Congress desire, and unless such regulations are confiscatory the courts shall have no say.—_Tarboro (N. C.) Southern._