Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-09-04

which he officially and emphatically con.
demned as impracticabIe.
In order to make a specious case for
himself Mr.. Doyle is compelled to talk
a great deal OF nonsense. Thus
be sets out with the assertion that rail.
road franchise is strictly analogous to
THAT OF turnpike road" Now that is
simply absurd. Between a railroad and
turnpike road there is, in fact, scarcely any
analogy. The truth is that when railroads
were first invented the stupid conservation
OF the lawyers impelled them to classify
the new mode of transportation with ex.
listing roads, and this initial blunder has
been the fruit Of endless confusion ever
since. As fact turnpike road is one
thing, and railroad is quite a different
thing; and to say that there is strict
analogy" between the two is, as we have
already observed, to talk nonsense. But
it is by such loose and unfourded assump.
tons that Mr.. Doyle proceeds to erect
for himself some kind of scaffolding for
the argument which is to show that rail.
road freights ought to be arranged on the
principle of the cost of service. In order
to meet the unanswerable argument that
high maximum is essential to the main
tenance of g low minimum, he asserts.
without shadow of evidence, that "the
low priced goods are charged full price,
and the more valuable ones have simply
"to pay 80 much more" Mr.. Doyle did
not talk in this loose way when he was
making his report as Railroad Commits.
sioner. Then he laid down as the prin.
cipleNwhich should govern classification of
| freight " The cost of carriage, the differ.
''ence of market values at the termini,
- and the charge ,chich goods riW bear"
Then he said ''If there are two classes
''of lumber which have different values
at San Francisco, although the cost of
carriage might be the same for each,
=" discrimination Of charys according to
'he difference of tie termiaa ualtes, might
"be allowable and nscesSaryyp
Now he wants to know why there should
be one rate for carload of fax seed, and
another for carload of wheat. Ii he has
really forgotten the PRINCIPLES upon which
classification rests, We advise him to CON.
suit the pages of his own report. He will
' acre find much clearer and more intelli.
ssp.s2ation Of the philosophy of
b. ertation than he has lately been CIV
ing the unfortunate readers of Hearst's
priv >ean. But We do not believe Mr..
Doyle ~ forgotten his former positions.
Rather we should be Inclined to suspect
that he thinks the public may have forgot
ten them, and that therefore he can ven.
ture to put forward the shallow sophisms
with which he Is helping to pad 81
] Hearst's Sunday organ. We do not be.
lfieve Mr.. Doyle is really SO unsophisticated
as he appears. We credit him with full
recognition OF the truth that the g cost of
"seryiee is as impracticabe as he de-
clared it to be few years ago, and an
equally full recognition of the fact that
the uniform cos. system, about which he
talks at present, can never be applied to
transportation.
Bat if he wants an answer to the ques-
ton, why carload of faKreed should be
rated differently from a carload of wheat,
we will give it him. 1t is because the two
things possess different values, and be-.
cause transportation all over the world is
done upon the principle, among others, Of
what the goods will bear; and because
that principle has been universally adopted
as the only one which will render possible
that elasticity of tariff which enables rail-
roads to carry low class freight at mini
mum rates. The carload of tea can better
afford to pay $50 ton than the carload of
wheat can afford to pay S. ton. The
consumer pays no more for his tea because
of the high freight; but if that high rate
We not charged On the tea, the wheat
could not be carried at all. If Mr.. Doyle's
impracticable method were applied, ard
cost of service were made the standard of
freight charges, the bulk of low class
freight would be excluded from market,
! because all rates would have to be leveled
up ip order to produce the necessary fixed
expenses OF the roads.
MIR. Doyle is, however, en- Intelligent
man, if he is not always ingenious and
candid. Doubtless he knows that the
principle he processes to approve has been
discarded everywhere after the most careful
examination that in England it is now
completely discredited that men like
Charles Francis Adams have condemned it
az futile and that the system of classified.
ton is in fact the worlds system to-day.
Ii MIR. Doyle's interview is the best that
Hearst's organ can do towards meeting the
arguments of Governor Ssanford's letter,
it is very poor outcome. In fact the
attempt to refute the Governors position
on the :" cost of service question is almost
benesth criticism. The organ also
should have gene to some body less deeply
committed in the opposite direction than
Mr.. Doyle. 1t is never we'll 60 ma.Ie a
man contradict himself in public, psrticu.
larly when he is being enployed as an
authority on a special topic. Hearst's
organ has hitherto paraded its Mr.. Doyle
with wonderful deal Of pride and
vaingloriousness, but whom he comes to be
placed in iuxtaposition with his own off.
Il .
cial utterances it seems te us that there is
not much lett Of him. Il will certainly
sske good deal heayia gins than he
carries to demolish G, Feruor Standards
POSITION
TEE irish cossrABULaRY.