Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-08-10
SAN rRAscrsoo AID TEE IsrsRroR.

SAN FRANCISCO AHD TEE INTERIOR,
Two San Ffanoisco papers are doing their
best to create belief il the public mind
that the sys.en, of freight contracts for
railroad transportation as at present in
operation is oppressive and unjust. As /
these journals have fortified themselves in |
advance by pretending that the merchants |
OF San Francisco ara afraid to make open |
Endorsement OF the charges against the
railroad, ct course they are relieved of the
necessity of proving any OF their aver.
menss. This is a very convenient way Of
dispensing with justifcatory evidence, and
l. enables the papers referred to to publish
the most extravagant fictions, and to credit
them TO merchants whose names are. for
obvious reasons, withheld. The few spe.
citic statements printed in this connection
by the anti-railroad press have been
promptly shown to have no foundation in
fact. by Dir. Stubbs. the freight-traffic
manager OF the Central Pacific. Mr. Doyle,
however, when ais stories are disproved,
cooily asserts that it does not matter
whether they are true or false. He has
built up strong indictment on the strength
OF these stories, but he claims that the in
dictmcnt ought to stand though its founda.
lions be swept away. That is fair ex.
ample of the kind of logic that is en-
ployed In the assaults upon the railroad.
1t will, however, interest our readers to
learn that though the current charges
about the contract system are fictitious,
there really does exist sense of dissatis.
faction among the San Francisco mer.
chants on this head |; and the cause of this
feeling ia one which the people of the in.
terror have direct interest in.
In recent conversation a partner in
one of the largest business houses of San
Francisco frankly admitted that the sore
point with the merchants of that city was
the fact that the railroad company gives
tine same rates and privileges to Sacra.
mento, Marysvilie, Stockton, San Jose,
Oakland and Los Angeles merchants, as are
enjoyed by those Of San Francisco. Pre-
vious to the building of the railroad, as
this merchant pointed out, the interior
traders were forced to import by way of
San Francisco, but for the most part they
bought Of the San Francisco merchants,
who controlled the trade of the coast. The
opening of the railroad changed the com.
mercial situation, by placing all the large
towns named above upon the same basis as
San Francisco. as regards rates and priv.
leges. This change necessarily destroyed
to great extent the monopoly which the
latter city had SO long possessed. but in
doing SO it built up the interior, and gave
| an impetus to all the towns of the second
and third class. Yet San Francisco still
possessed considerable advantage, and
continued to hold it until the railroad I'm.
dertook to meet the competition of the
Cape Horn route, when the low rates made
necessary under the contract system tended
to benefit the interior merchants still
more, and by equaiizing advantages took
from those of San Francisco much of the
advantage they had come to look upon as
their prescriptive right.
This is the candid statement. of one of
the largest importers in San Francisco, and
the facts he states may well be pondered
carefully by the merchants of the interior.
For they show conclusively that the
present dissatisfaction with the contract
system springs altogether from resentment
at the destruction of a commercial monop.
oily, the only possible outcome of which
could have been to build up San Fran
cisco at the expense of every other town
II California. The railroad company has
of course very difficult course to pursue.
1t is bound to satisfy all of its customers,
a. far as is possible. II cannot, Sor would
it, seek to injure San Francisco. But if,
as Is claimed, it is under obligation to
consult the public interests more than an
ordinary business firm need do, Che fact
must be clear that its only policy is to
seek the greatest equalization Of rates
attainable The contract system tends to
this object, and for that very reason it has
become obnoxious to the San francisco
merchants, who certainly do MT admit
that there is any "public use " ia their
business, and who have always sought las
in fact do all business men every,vhere) to
obtain the largest amount of trade without
any regard to the ultimate effects of the
monopoly they wished to establish.
They now find that Sacramento and
Marysville and Stockton and San Jose
and Los Angeles merchants can do their
transportation On as advantageous terms
as they themselves are able to. They
have thus lost great advantage, and
we do not say that it is at all unnatural
for them to resent it. But il il perfectly
clear that the public interest is in no way
identified with theirs in this matter, and
that the policy of the railroad has been
beneficial to the State at large, even ii San
Francisco merchants have lost somewhat
by it.
| This clamor against the contract system
Is In short purely local question, and
it does not rest upon any basis such as
could make it public question. The
San Francisco merchants of course cannot
come forward and declare candidly that
they have quarrel with the railroad
because it has refused to subject the in.
terror merchants TO their commercial des.
potism. That, however, is the real cause
OF their present discomfort. The plain
truth is that every class of business men
would be willing to build themselves up
at the expense Of every other class. The
great importers are dissatisfied because the
railroad will not make such arrangements
as would enable them to contsol the
market entirely. The smaller merchants
are dissatisfied because the railroad will
not and cannot allow them to con.
troll the interior merchants. If the rail.
road would 30 arrange rates as that San
Francisco could monopolize the trade of
the coast, as of old, there would be no
more cutlery against the contract system.
1t is case of San Franciaco interests
against State interests, and the railroad
is really protecting the latter, as it