Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-02-09


consumers of everything which the Eas
manufactures The low rate for a Ion
haul of the manufactured articles of tn
East promotes consumption in the West
This keeps the Eastern spindles in motion
and they consume the cotton of the South
1t keeps the looms in action. and they use
the wool of all sections of the country.
IT FILLS THE FURNACES
And FORCES and rolling mills with orders
1t deepens and extends the mines, and ere
ates market for the product. 1t fill
manufacturing localities with dense popu
! lations, and thus secures to the Easter
agricuiturist home market and good price
for all of the products OF his farm. Il
every way it benefits the East. Does i
harm the country at large? Look at tn
balance of. trade against Europe in on
favor. What would it have been but fo
the enormous crops of the West and th'
long haul which carried them to market
This it was that brought the cattle, sheep
hogs, wheat, -four, corn, and other product
from the remote West, and sent then
abroad to feed the people of the Old World
This it was that largely made up our bal
ance OF trade, and brought home your bonds
and gave US the coin of Earope. No such
results would have been realized but fol
the wondrous development of the West
and that developments could not have oc
Cured under the fourth section of thi.
bill. These considerations show that
we are dealing with subject which can
not be confined within the narrow lin
its of the question put during the
discussion which occurred here last Friday
SIS it just to make one man pay more thar
another for like service We are on a
broader field than that-one that is filled
with problems of public policy, bristling
with questions for the economist, and lead
ing on to the mountain ranges on which
statesmen tread The markets of Europe,
which for two years have welcomed our
products In such vast quantities, were
thrown open by misfortune in large de.
gree. The seasons were unfavorable, and
the crops failed. Should these conditions
be changed-as they may be this very year
we must bring other elements into the
case, in order to command the markets OF
Europe. We must enable the people of the
West to put their cheap lands and abund-
ant products in successful competition with
the producers of Europe through the very
principle which the fourth section of this
bill forbids. Here is consideration sufii-
cient of itself to eliminate this subject from
the narrow space to which it is consigned
by the question have noticed, and to place
it in the broader field and higher position
that have mentioned. We must look -
BEYOND THE PRIVATE ELEMENT
,oh he ~,
and give attention to the public welfare.
If this be not the character of our posi-
ton, why is this question here at all? To
say that it is wrong to tax one man for the
benefit of another, don't meet the case at
all. 1t may seem wrongto charge one man
S40for haulinga car load of freight 250 miles,
and another only 500 for transporting a
car load of the same kind of freight ZOO
miles. But when the public interests re-
quire that both loads 90 to market the case
assumes very different aspect. 1t no
longer presents a question III which the
private shippers and the railroad companies
are alone parties in interest. If these cars
are to pass from one State to another the
freight which they carry becomes part of
the commerce among the States, and, in
common with all other property thereunto
belonging, may, in case of obstruction,
whether by States, railroad companies, or
other causes, call into action the regulative
power of Congress. 1t is charged that OBJ
structions do exist. Hence, the question is
here. 1t has no right to be here until it has
become more than the question of private
rights and wrongs of individuals. 1t must
concern the public, and round upinto
proportions large enough to demand
the interposition of public policy.
Questions of abstract private wrongs must,
in thousand ways, yield to the inevitable
inequalities which result from organized
society. "The greatest good to the great
est number, one of the accepted political
axioms of this country, implies evil to the
few. Until this subject has been taken
out Of the field of discussion of abstract
private right, it is not entitled to a pres
ence here. This is the reason why cannot
treat this question as one concerning merely
the railroad companies that l represent
here and their private patrons. When
these companies with their roads and the
patrons with their freights come together,
they put commerce in motion, and public
interest is developed. Now, when this oc-
ours, the inevitable inequalities which may
arise in course of conducting it properly
and in the public interest must be tolerated,
as they are in thousands of other cases in
organized society, in order that public well
fare may be maintained and the greatest
good to the greatest number promoted.
The low rate for the long haul is one of the
things which arise from these conditions,
and sound public policy demands that it
be endured. But this, it is said, is
TAXING SHIPPERS FOR LOCAL MARKET
And the buyers in them to make up de-
ficiencies resulting from the low rate for the
long haul. In certain sense this is true
but in another and more practical sense it
is rot true. The shipper who pays the
relatively high rate for the short haul can
still sell his products in the local market at
as low price as can the shipper who pays
the low rate for the long haul, and make a
better profit. Other conditions being equal,
the amount of money in partpaid for
transportation determines this. One hun.
dred dollars per car for one thousand miles
may be low rate, and forty dollars pei
car for two hundred and fifty miles, by
comparison, seem high rate. But other
SOiiNilbiOAS AOi
freight, notwithstanding the seeming ine-
quality, or discrimination, if it be SC
called, yields its owner the best return in
the market. Why should he complain, Q,
why should anybody complain Tor him
Taking the forty-dollar rate as the basis for
fixing rate for the thousand mile carriage
might result IN the absorption of the en-.
tire value of the freight, or keeping it away
from market altogether. Now which is tine
hard rule? The one which lets both ship.
pers into the market, or the other which
Tets one in at profit and shuts the Other
out: The latter IS the one which the
fourth section of this bill presents to the
remote section of the country. Ii the for.
mer rule
TAXES ONE MAN FOR THE BENEFIT OF AN.
OTHER
What does this one do? Which rule viii
most conserve the public interests Which
one ought to be maiutained-the one which
gives both men chance, or the one which
protects one and brushes the other? The
latter destroys competition and establishe:
monopoly by operation of law. In our en-
deavors to get rid of one form OF Unequal
ity are we not in great danger of establish.
ing one OF greater enormity? And if we
insist on the complete eradication of all in
equalities of taxation and other burden;
incidental to government, business, trade
| and commerce, would we have much left