The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1855-04-11

THE DAILY WoI "A I'll
WEDNEsDAy MoRNIN0.........Arn I'll a leoo
=, auoc AND ALEXANDRIA AND CENTRAL
RAILROADS.
Tn. Alexandria Sentinel of the 5th inst,
complsins Of supposed unwillingness on the
mart Of the Central Company to get r'a 9.
tr.nshipment ut 0ordonsviile, and also tna.
The provisions of the Blue Ridge hahroao
Charter have been disregarded. by making
tss they aver an addition OF VI per TON "
an Alexandra freights which cross the noun
tain track.
The Sentinel compliments US for our hbe-
raj views. We feel confident that our con-
temporary only wants correct information on
the subject, to do justice to the Central Road
and to Richmond. We are authorised to
make the following explanations, to correct
the erroneous impressions made by the Sen
tinel's article, and hope that they may arrest
the growth of any feeling of jealousy between
the two companies.
lst To show that the Central Company has
not been to blame for not adopting plan Tor
interchange of cars, we insert the following
extract from the last report of that Company.
1t had been rumored about Charlottesville,
that obstacles to such an arrangement were
thrown in the way by the Central Company.
In reply to which, the board says: '5
.This board IL not aware that there ID any ground
for the existence Of Jealousy on the subject Of
heights They may safely leave the public to consult
that the Interest Of cash win be best promoted BY
Offering liberal facilities.
mo arrangement has yet been made for tne tao
roads TO avoid the evil Of transhipmsnt proper,
however, TO remark that this board entertaining the
asement Of rslrosds like ours in Virginia. whore the
State owns majority OF the stock, to endeavoI 70
msnity = practable are ready at any time to enter
into any equitable and reciprocal arrangement for
carrying out that object. Such an arrangement has
not been made as your board learn from the officers
81 the Orange and Aiexandria Company oecs1se
they have not yet. sufficient supply OF cars ior
the purpose"
I'D. It is not fact, as supp osed. that there
ID Especial or extra charge" for transport
ing over the mountain track freight coming
nom Alexandria, from which similar freight
from Richmond is exempt. The mountain
track was built at very great cost, over the
Blue Ridge, where the tunnels and other
parts of the State work were unfinished; and
as the working of it is attended with an ex-
pense many times exceeding that of the same
distance on any other part of the road, it is
generally conceded to be right to make an
extra charge for all freight passing over it.
The general rule for fixing the charge OF
''way freight" meaning Thereby any freight
brought to the road at an intermediate sta
ton, is, to make it pay the same as the arti-
Gle would pay, carried similar distance from
Richmond; that is, the Alexandria freight be
ing carried to Staunton, distance of sixty
miles, would pay the same that similar freight
is charged from Richmond to 60 mile sta
ton, which is Louisa C. FL. There being, of
course, no tax on the Louisa Court House
freight for crossing the mountain track, reg.
ulated by this rule alone, if the cents per
100 lbs. was omitted, the Alexandria freight
would thus be exempt from any charge at
all for crossing the mountain. while the charge
on erery article carried from Richmond to
Staunton IS greater, by reason of its cross
ing the mountain track than it would be, but
for the existence of that special expense
Does Alexandria ask that Richmond trade
shall be taxed for crossing the mountain,
while her own shall be exempt! That would
be discrimination in her favor and against
Richmond, which the editor disclaims.
An examination of the freight table of the
Central Road, would have shown that all
Richmond freight carried over the mountain
track, is taxed on that account. 1t is the
practice, and just and proper one, on all
railroads, to charge more in proportion for
short distances than long ones; in other
words, as road extends, the charge per
mile is not continued in the same proportion
rs that established for shorter distances, but
is reduced below it.
Let US 60 to the freight table, as the Senti-
mel should have done, and we shall find that
plaster is charged at Charlottesville SAYS
per ton, distance of 81 miles. To extend
the charge per mile at the full ratio, would
make it at Staunton only 1897, while the &C.
tual charge is $3.50 The ordinary rules on
railroads would have reduced the charge be-.
low 1897, while the mountain track compels
the company to carry it up to $3.50
Guano at Charlottesville is 90; a rateable
increase per mile, would have carried it only
to s4.33 at Staunton, while the actual charge
there is $5.
On salt, too, the tables show, that the &C.
fual price at Stsunton, exceeds the regular
progressive increase on the Charlottesville
rate, by 2-lO Of cent. per 100 lbs, whilst
instead of exceeding the ratio but for the
mountain track it would have fallen below
the ratio of increase. An examination of the
tables throughout shows the same results;
but the three articles have been selected in
which it seems Alexandra was most inter.
ested, and although it is not stated in SO MANY
words that cents per 100 lbs or 81 per ton
Is laid On for the mountain track upon Rich.
mond trade, yet calculation shows that in
The regulation of the Staunton charge 81 per
ton was practically imposed on the articles
coming from Richmond, as indes ed is the case
with all others.
Sd. 1t will be equally difficult to sustain tho
imputation that the 18th section Of Rlue R;dce
Railroad law is disregarded. The true ;n.