How could an individual contend against a force like that? In the words of Chief Justice Ryan, in the first great railroad case in Wisconsin,
"Their influence is so large, their capacity for resistance so formidable, their powers of oppression so various, that few private persons could litigate with them, still fewer persons would litigate with them for the little rights or the little wrongs which go so far to make up the measure of the average prosperity of life."
But a few kept on with the fight, and notwithstanding the power of the railroads, the "Granger movement" suddenly took form. Someway or somehow it was realized that the state—the whole body of citizens as a unit—could collectively accomplish what one man, single handed, could not, i.e. equalize the conditions of contract by placing force against force. This is why the "Potter law" for the control of railroads was enacted in Wisconsin in the early seventies. That law was a crude attempt; it was full of long schedules of rates made in a haphazard manner by the legislative committees. It did, however, lay down the precedent that when a force is so great that no one individual can meet it and receive
