Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-04-19

lows to San Francisco is 50 25: the Board
rate Is IS. The present rate to Port Costa is
81 10; the Board rate is 50 So. The present
rate from \ olo to San Francisco is 81 so;
the Board rate is 81 %. The present
"a rate TO port Costa is 50; the Board rate is
- 20. Ihe present rate from Calistoga to San
Francisco Is 81 So; the Board rate is 81 so.
The present rate to Port Costa il 50 IS; the
Board rate is 81 10. The present rate from
St. Helena to San Francisco is 81 So the
Board rate is So. The present rate to Port
Costa Is 81 %; the Board rate is 81 20. The
present rate from Reading to San Francisco
Is 30 % the Board rate is 81 so. The pres
ens rate to Fort Costa is S5 40; the Board
rate Is 81 81; The present rate from Red
rate is 81 10. The present rate to Port Costa
is 50 20; the Board rate is IS 90. The pres.
ent rate from Chico to San Francisco is
81 40; the Board rate is 81 TO- The present
rate to Port Costa is 81 80 the Board rate is
s. 90. The present rate from BiCgs to San
Francisco is SS S5; the Board rate is S3 60.
The present rate to Port Costa is SS IS: the
Board rate is SO %.
WHY SOUTHERN RATES WE'RE NOT FIXED.
Rep.-Do these reductions take effect gen.
orally on all the stations of the lines named?
MIR. Beerstecher-Yes
Rep.-Are the reductions proportionate
tSANShbaSo upOn IHS OLler articles emu
merated IN the proposed schedule
Mr.. Beerstecher-They are.
Rep.-How does it come that no reduc-
tious are made south of Tehachepiy
MIR. Beerstecher-Commis Cone and
myself were principally engaged in working
out the contemplated reductions Written
blanks, containing the names Of the railroads
upon which these reductions should take
place and of the stations, were in use in this
Otflca nyar thraa MOI ha AL 10
sioners were all aware of the character of the
work being performed. Commissioner Cone
and myself confined our work to the lines
and places named, supposing that Commits
sioner Stoneman would attend to Los An
geles and the country 10 that vicinity, and
would prepare q schedule of such reductions
as he thought proper for the products of the
soil in the neighborhood of his home, submit
ting the same to the Commission and having
them printed in common with the other con-
templated reductions He has failed to do
this himself, nor has he made any suggestions
to the Commission in relation to reductions.
Rep.-Did you ever speak to General
Stoneman personally in relation to freights
on oranges, lemons and products of the south
ern coGntryy
Mr.. Beerstecher-I did, several times. L
spoke to General Stonemsn on Saturday at
the time the proposed tariff came into the
Office. | spoke to him at the time L offered
my resolutions. / told him then that the
proposed tariff net affecting transportation
south of Tehachepi, such matters as might
interest that portion of the State,
HAD BEEN LEFT To HIM,
And that any reasonable suggestion in the
way of just and equitable adjustment and
reduction of rates for the product of that
country would be gladly received aud acted
upon by me.
Rep.-What answer did he make to that,
if any?
MIR. Beerstecher-He didn't make any an.
swer.
Rep-Can you assign any reason why Cen
eral Stoneman has failed to act in harmony
with the other members of the Commission,
and why such protest as the spurious pro-
test which appeared in print in the Sunday
Chronicle should have been made public
Mr.. Beerstecher-Yes.
Rep.-State why, if you please, and also if
General Stoneman has sver made any SUCCESS
tions in relation to reduction of freight rates
Mr.. Beerstecher-General Stoneman has
made, at several times, offers to reduce freight
rates from thirty-three and a third per cent.
to fifty per cent. to me. My reply was that
if the Commission attempted reduction of
that character without thorou, II examina-
ton and arbitrarily, that the cons euuence of
such an action on cur part would be to pre-
cipitate innumerable lawsuits with the rail-
road companies. which would be carried into
the State and Federal Courts, and bind up
the Board by iniunctions for years to come,
thus destroying the utility and benefits of
this Commission, and would involve the State
in thousands and tens of thousands of dollars
of legal expenses; that in my opinion lust
and graduated reduction would be far prefer
able to innumerable lawsuits and injunctions
which would prevent any action on the part
of this Board
HIS REPLY
To ne was that that was none of our busi.
ness; that the State would willingly contribute
money to carry on lawsuits against the rail-
road companies, and to defend any lawsuits
that the railroad company might bring against
this Board that if We passed such resolu-
tions we could go home and rest, without
being troubled any further during cur term
Of cfiice to fix any rates, as the suits would
take years to determine and we would have
the credit for attempting reductions, although
the sane never took place that if he and
pursued this course, we could have any politi-
cal emoluments in the gift of the people
which we might desire.