Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1879-01-22
CONCERNING DETERMINATIONS AND
SPECIAL CONTRACTS BY RAILROAD
COMPANIES

Before us lies a report of the Committee of
Railroad Transportation of the New York
Board of Trade upon the bill now pending III
Congress for the regulation of Interstate
commerce. The recent character of this re-
port is indicated in the fact that it was adop
ted on the eighth of this month
showing how strong is the present feeling IN
the great commercial emporlums of the coun-
try upon the all-absorbing question of rail-
road abuses After reciting the principal
features of the so-called Regain Bill, the COM
laittee comments and quotes as subjoined :;
- There should be" says the committee,
& standard of quantity or merit established,
and regarding this, the testimony of Col.
Fink, the fairest, and perhaps the ablest, of
railroad managers, is as follows.
.: do not think that common carrier has
the legal right to enter into special contracts
With manufacturing establishments to carry
freight at a less rate than for the public gen
orally, for the purpose of encouraging the
erection of such establishment ON the line of
its road.
1t is not the province of railroad companies
to make themselves partners in private enter
I,rIses Even if they had the legal right, it is
questionable whether it would be good policy
tor them to do so.
Nor do | think it right that common car
riers should make special contracts on account
Of the quantity shipped, except when guam
tity forms element in the cost of the trans
portaton service, and this IS only the case ,Chen
thu quantities are less than carloads.
1t does not cost more to carry ten carloads
for one shipper, than it costs to carry one car
load for each of ten shippers The railroad
company derives as much benefit from ten
small manufacturing establishments as from
one larger one of the capacity of ten smaller
ones.
Il the railroad company grant to the larger
establishments lower rates of transportation
it would I'm Justly discriminate against parties
with limited means, and DE of no benefit to
the railroad company. common carrier
should strictly adhere to the rule to charge
the same rate of transportation OF the same
article between the same points, only dis
terminating on account of quantity as far as
IL influences the cost of transportation. He
should not make any arbitrary distinctions
merely depending upon his will From, Re
port BY Mr. Niam) on Internal Commerce,
IST.
Certain businesses and practices and alb
sorhings by our local companies are not in
APPLY limited at and rebuked by Finks aver
Ilent that - 1t is not the province OF railroad
companies to make themselves partners il.
private enterprises. Certain bearings and
dabblngs in wood and timber, coaI-oil and
iron -mongery, tin and plumbers goods,
haymaking and mule teaming, known of GER
tain railroad owners living in San Francisco
AID doing business i'll Carson and Eureka are
called to mind by this declaration
The asseveration is timely and of much local
interest that . 1t does not cost more to carry
ten carloads of freight between two stations,
A and B, for one shipper than it does to car
~ one carload for each of ten shippers. III
any law looking to a prohibition of discrlm
nations let our legislators take these author
itative statements into serious consideration.