The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-08-13
BALTIMORE.
MONDAY, AUGUST ID, 1860

SIN, for the first time declared ITSELF on one of the
most important questions of the session We are
pleased TO find that its views now do not differ
materially from our own expressed last winter In
the same article it intimated that the opposition of
THE EXCHANGE 10 Mr.. GARRETT's scheme was
much more energetic than to that of Mr..
BROCK. AS we thought then, and think still
that Mr.. GARRETT attempt to alter the consitu
ton of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, was
much more pernicious to the interests of this CITY
than what Mr.. Brock proposed and inasmuch as,
in our opposition to the former, we stood alone,
while in the latter we had the furious efforts of
The Sun to aid us, we might very well allow the
case to stand as our neighbor has seen fit to state
it, 1t is due to truth; however, to recall to its
recollection the fact that were the first to point
out the utter illegally of Brock s pretended char
ter and the nullity of the ordinance on which his
grant depends, and that we have written at least
five articles against the Brock iniquity to one
against the policy of the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad or Mr. GARRETT's effort to procure an in
furious amendment to its charter If we have fallen
short in our duty, it has surely not been in the
moderation ofour resistancein the former case and
its vgor in the latter. Whatever may be the present
estimate which The San places upon our services
in the matter of BROCK & Co., there was certainly
a time it thought, Or at all events, spoke very
differently, as it would be easy to show from its
columns did we consider it of sufficient import
ance. But enough, and perhaps too much of this
If Tile San rejoices with us, and as sincerely as we
do in the defeat which Messrs. Brock and GARRETT
alike encountered, we are perfectly willing to have
our respective shares of the praise or blame of
the result in either case determined by this COM
munity 1t is but lost time, when the attention
of both is demanded to living and practical ques-
ton OF such overwhelming Importance to this CITY
as the policy of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad,
to dispute about the short comings or services in
the past of either of u.s.
Although possibly intending TO do so, The Sun
has not yet answered our questions as to what
constitutes discrimination for or against the trade
of Baltimore, by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad.
II intimates very courteously, that we have not
drought clearly before our mind the real ques-
''tion involved in our own inquiry We shall
be equally 'Fpardoned' for suggesting that when
The Sun makes the att empt to answer our inter-
rogatories in terms, and has given them suffi-
cient amount of thought to be able to do so in a
manner satisfactory to its own intelligence, it will
perhaps discover that we this subject in light.
TO which it has not yet attained. The San should
understand that we have proposed as yet to
discuss the policy of discrimination solely as |
between the city OF Baltimore and points |
further East. There is another very impor
tant question of discrimination upon local
freights, which includes consideration of the
uronr Of oh h.
the road so much higher, per b., per mile, as
altogether to nullify the advantage of geographi.
cal proximity to the seaboard. This is point
which we have no objection to argue, at the |
proper moment and is one upon which we are |
now prepared to say that the management of |
the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad pursues a |
course which is in direct conflict with the pros
perity of the people of Maryland and Virginia |
interested in its local trade We believe and
at the proper time are prepared to show that. so
far as the advantages of market are concerned,
the inhabitants this side of the Ohio river on
whose soil the road is built and who have been
taxed for its construction little or no better
of than those of Indiana or Illinois. Baltimore, OF
course, feels indirectly the effects of the Injustice of
this discrimination in favor of the distant freight of
the West, in the suppression of a near trade which
belongs to her, and which could take from her
The road itself suffers from hsiniusice to its friends
and dependents still more. 1t brushes the embryo
trade, or rather neurazes theprocreativep powers
of all the vast and infinitely productive region be-
tween the city of Baltimore and the point where the
road enters the field of competition with its North
ern rivals. 1t prevents the increase of business
Nvb cb in ;f.
Development is the roads sole property, that it
may hight with greedy and reckless competing routes
Tor distant trade, which hardly pays its own ex-
penses But this, as have said, is not the cues
ton Immediately before US, and however interest
ing and profitable its discussion might be, we now
turn from it, 1t is proper, however, to clear I'M
derstanding of what we propose to advance, that
we should say, we are fully of sound reasons
why merchandise, which moves but short dis
lance upon the line of railroad should be subject
to heavier charges pro rata than that which goes
farther upon the same line A portion of the cost
OF transportation in all cases, consists of items
which are the same, whether the article is moved
one mile or one hundred and allowance for this is
always just and has never been considered oppres-
sive. Again, the road ought to have fair re.
muneratlon for services performed, and the only
freight which it can absolutely control is the wav
freight, and that is one reason why way business
should be cherished When it enters the field ofcom
petition with other routes, its rates are governed
by laws altogether different from those which guide
1t IN It's local business If it does distant business at
ALL it must work as cheaply as other lines. mas
much, therefore, as it may not be always advisable
g.
little or nothing be made by it, it would of
course, be runous to the road if its way business
Ut all times, was charged only pro rata with IFS
o'her business. 1t would not seem, therefore, to
DE required by the principles of justice, that it
should do more for its way trade, than treat it with
conslderate and consistent equity-establish fair
rates, and lnvIoably adhere to them 1t sbould |
not, for the sake of appearing to do large bust
ness, attract distant freight by offering to carry it
Tor nothing, and for the sake of appearing TO do n
profitable one, saddle the loss the way business.
We trust that on this preliminary point we have
made ourselves plain. We do not ask for the wav
business absolutely the same rates per per mile as
Tor the other. We allow our road to enter the field
OF competition with other roads, to fight and, if if
can, defeat them. We only wish that the way rates
be maintained at steady and equitable standard.
ana that the cost of an unproductive remote
business should not be made up by increased
charges upon the near business. We now return
10 'he oisunct point of discrimination apans
Baltimore, and 10 show at once where we arc ,re
the principle, that under no con-
eeiva6le circumstances, should pound of freipbt
be carried over the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad at a lower rate per Mound
per mile to New York or PHILADELPHIA. or
my other point, than to Baltimore We desire
10 state this proposition as one which should be
subject to no exception whatever. Whether the
is at peace, or may be carving
4 war into Afrca-whether as a temporary
Or permanent policy" to adopt a different
construction, is to stab the trade of Bal
tmore under the fifth rib The fayorite
node OF meeting this proposition is to state
case like the following Suppose, it is
,ontended there is, at some central point in the
West, lot of freight, achich is going to New York
rnyhow: as it has the choice of any one of tbe
our great routes, what harm is done TO Rati.
more if our road take that freight for less per ton
per mile than it would accept for the same TO
Baltimore? 1t is clear that Baltimore would
not get this lot in any case and the road,
ays The Sun, should not CLOSE the the