Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-02-27
THE RAILROAD CONTROVERSY.

Bile to expect that men equally competent may
and will differ. They will remember, also,
how easy it is, in all discussions into which
igu -es enter, so to array the figures, by pre-
senting such only as serve a purpose, and thus
give impressions wholly at variance with facts.
These considerations suggest that it may be
proper to defer, with reasonable confidence,
to the judgment of competent men, who have
carefully considered all the law, all the figures,
and all the experience of other roads bearing
on the case.
By the Judgment upon the questions in dis
pute between the Boston and Western roads,
the latter, of it can help it, will not abide.
One step, we hear, is to go before the Court
and ask the appointment of new referees but
this is not probable. The Springfield Repub-
lican must have been misinformed. 1t is a
mode of settlement which has never been ia
vored by the directors of the Western rail-
road. They were once offered board of re-
1. Sargent) should be from themselves, and
one Mr.. d. Denny from the directors of the
Boston road, which they refused. In March,
1857, other propositions were made, two of
which are worth looking at =
LIST. "To divide all joint receipts pro rata
per mile to and from all joint points each
corporation to charge cost for depot charges"
ID "The Boston and Worcester railroad
corporation propose to refer all questions IN
dispute to three men, to be appointed by the
Supreme Court"
And, in Jnne, the same road again, proposed
to unite with the other in petition to the Su-
preme Court for the appointment OF commits
sioners to determine all questions at issue"
In August the answer to this came in the form
of service from the Court giving notice that
the Western Road had petitioned to have re-
ferees appointed to dispose of, not all that was
unsettled, but certain specified questions"
In regard to the award, it is vehemently OBJ
iected that the Boston road will receive by it
higher rate per ton for freight from Boston
to Worcester, than it charges its Worcester
customers. This is true, substantially, upon
freight delivered on the Western road east of
Palmer. 1t is also true, that the Western
will receive more than its local tariff rates from
Albany to Worcester ON all the freight for the
several way-stations on the Boston road. With
local rates, however, the Commissioners had
no concern. Plain business was to decide how
the joint earnings should be divided and it
was with the joint tariff only that they had to
do. An important fact in this connection is, that
the Through" business, i. e., that which passes
beyond, or is received from beyond Albany,
pays much less than any other. The united
roads are part of the long line which unites
the East and the West, and they share with
the other parties to it in the receipts there
from according to the distance carried, excud-
ing all such considerations as comparative
cost of roads, or expense of maintaining them
Clearly it would be unjust to divide the earn
ings from this business ON any other basis
than the sum actually received from it,
whether remunerative or not. So, again. if
other freight pays better, the principle of a
just division would give the parties interested
the same share therein, without regard to the
Through" or to ''locar' tariffs.
While rates are variable, and while they are
not based upon the distance carried, we see no
actually collected for the work done. And so
long as prices vary per mile from station to
station, making just uniform rule impos-
sible, the share of the parties must vary to
the same extent. This was recognized by
the commissioners and it compelled them to
determine the amount to be paid each road up
on all rates between Worcester and Albany
and between Albany and Worcester. 1t was
this which led the Supreme Court to say, that
this award "does nothing more than fix with
the greatest minuteness and precision The sum
which each corporation is to receive for its
compensation in every particular instance of
service performed for the other"
But the managers of the Western road pro
pose that the number of tons carried one mile
should first be ascertained, and the share of
each be according to the distance carried by
each. The Boston road, on the other hand,
asked pro-rata division of the earnings of all
freight in which there was joint interest. If,
for illustration, one ton groceries should be
carried 20 miles by the Boston road and 40 by
the Western, at 2 cents per mile, it would take
40 cents and yield the Western so cents or il
one ton coal was carried 40 and so miles at II
cents, the relative share would be 60 cents and
cents, so cents and go respectively This,
the Boston road claims, is just what was earn
ed by each, and is according to the facts but
the Western road asked that these tons
should be estimated as so tons carried one
mile by one and 160 tons one mile by the other
road; an arbitrary division, the aim of which
we will show -
Let us take the actual business in 1859, be-
tween Boston and Springfield and Boston and
Albany :-22,673 tons from Boston to Albany
gave $l2l ,048 81, or about 67-100 cents per ton
per mile; A miles over Boston road would
give it $26,630 Ga 156 miles over Western
road would give it 1914, All 70. 5,823 tons from
Boston to Springfield gave $29,721 IA, or about
1900 cents per ton per mile; pro rata would
give the Boston road $10,650 So, (44 miles,
and the Western (54 miles, s13,O71 16. This,
of course, was actually paid by freighters.
But, by the Western rule, (22,679 tons to
Albany, 200 miles, and 1898 tons to Spring
field, SO miles, being put together and re-
duced to one mile on each road,) the West
ern road would receive 1925 43 more, and
the Boston the same sum less, than the pro
rata rule. Yet, if the same rule should be
applied to the passenger business between the
same points during the same time, the Boston
and Worcester road would receive 1851 81
more and the Western the same sum less than
pro rata proportion.