Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-02-13
The Anti.Discrimination BILL.


The Anti. Dissemination BILL.
The House committee which has been
considering the bill introduced by Mr..
Reagan, to forbid determinations by rail-
roads in freight rates, has determined by
a bare majority not to recommend its
adoption. This simply means, We pre-
sumo, that the committee is not satisfied |
that the Reagan bill will correct the evil |
it seeks to remedy and which confessed
ly exists. There is great difference of
opinion among those who are earnestly
desirous of securing fair treatment OF
every business interest by the carrying
companies, as to the legislation needed
for the purpose. 1t seems clear enough
that one man should not be charged
more than another for the same service
rendered bya transporter of their goods;
and apparently it is easy to frame law
which will say SO but really it seems to
Ike very difficult. The difficulty mainly lies
in defining what is the same service. The
railroad companies claim the privilege OF
securing business by giving better rate
of freight to large customers than to
smaller ones and the claim seems rea-
sonable; also to charge less. proportion
ately, for long haul than Il short one;
which also seems right. Another claim
which they make is not SO clearly juStiti-
able, although it is sustained by an ap-
parently strong argument: for the pur-
pose of meeting competition they are in
the habit of giving drawback on freight
carried into competing market. For
instance the Reading company gives
such drawback to coal shipped east
ward from Philadelphia because other
wise the shippers could not sell their coal
in New York at as Iowa rate rs it is sold
by the coal carrying companies who have
a shorter haul from their mines to New
York and can deliver their product there
at less cost than can the Reading. The
result is that Philadelphia may pay more
than New York for coal that is carried
through her limits to reach the New
York market. This does not seem to be
right nor is it Oh the other hand clear
that the Reading should not he at
liberty to sell her coal in New
York. \ private individual doing the
business which a railroad company is
doing certainly could not he properly re-
stricted by the law in selling where and
how he plessed, and at Il price to suit
himself But the rule must be different
with chartered corporation which ac'
quires its power through the privileges
granted it by the state, and which may
therefore lie justly required to use those
powers SO as to do the public interest nc
injury. If Mr.. GOwen's claim is adj
mitted, that he is justified il
charging Il smaller price for ;
haul through Philadelphia to New
York than to Philadelphia alone
then no practicable limit can he placet
upon the power of carrying company t.
discriminate in its charges. AS he wa
reminded by the congressional cOmmitte
before which he testified, the great rail
road companies justify their practice o
charging a lower rate on grain to tn
seaboard from the West than they cllarg
for less distance. by declaring that it
necessary to enable them to mee
the competition of the great grain
growing districts of the Black Sea
1t seems necessary to conline each carry
ing company to its natural field. If MI
GOwen cannot get his coal into NeN
York as cheaply as another company it
clear enough that New York is not hi
natural market. lie has no busines
there; and the state which has charter
ed his company ought not to permit hil
togo there with the coal raised out of he
own bosom, to sell it at less price tha
is charged to her own citizens nearer t
the mines. That proposition seems S
manifest that it is proved by its state
memt.