Morning journal and courier., 1882-03-16
MIR. ALBERT FINK,s REPORT.


 The report of Mir. Albert Fink on the ques- | tions involved in the trunk line railroad war contains good deal that is news to many who have been discoursing concerning the 1 railroad problem without knowing much l about the facts of the case. For instance, it has not been generally understood that of the 1 total tonnage carried from the West to the seaboard in the year ending December 31, 1880, by the four trunk-line roads only 264 per cont. originated at what are considered the great points of competition in the West, namely Chicago Peoria, St. Louis, Indian apolis, Cincinnati and Louisville The other 734 per cent. of the tonnage was ir the nature of local traffic originating on the lines of the roads at non-competing points It has been generally supposed that the trunk lines were fighting over larger amount of tonnage than a quarter of the totel. The relative amount of the 264 per cent. origin ating at the six great competing points is also interesting. Chicago furnished 14.43 per cent. Peoria, 3.72 per cent. St. Louis, 3.22 per cent. Indianapolis, 2.72 per cent. Cincinnati, 1.46 per cent, and Louisville o. 70 per cent. All the rest of the through freight from the West to the seaboard (except 6.99 per cent. from minor points of competition) comes from non competing minor points. It is also further shown by Mir. Finks statistics that from June 15 to November 1, 1881, dur ing the trunk-line war, the distribution of even this competitive traffic was not materi- ally changed as compared with the preceding twelve months. The New York Central and Hudson River railroad gained 1 1-1O per cent, the New York, Lake Erie and Western gained 1-10 per cent, the Pennsylvania gained 5-1O per cent, and the Baltimore and Ohio lost ? 7-1O per cent, this latter loss, however, being due to the loss of the winter wheat crop in Indiana, Ohio and parts of southern Illinois
 Mir. Fink presents other interesting and instructive facts in his report, and argues from them that no war of rates can ever ma terially change the proportion of the gross amount of the traffic from the West to any ment that might be entered into between the roads which would make such change con- trary to the natural laws and conditions of the traffic would be adhered to by the roads that the proper plan of dividing the com petitive traffic is to make such division of the tonnage between the railroads at the com petitive sources of it's origin, but at the same time fixing the relative rates of freights to the various seaboard cities at such figures that western shippers shall not be coerced into doing business at one in preference to the other and finally, that the relative ad- vantages of the several seaboard cities as re- gards ocean freights, warehousing of grain, etc., etc., will necessarily be the question with the western shipper when railroad freights from the West are adjusted even upon differential basis in accordance with the distance of the transportation from the West to the seaboard.
 Mir. Finks conclusions seem to be very sensible and to be supported by his facts. His report throws new and needed light on some parts of the railroad problem.