Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-06-29
SHIPPING GRAIN.
The Railroad Wants $4,000 Bushel Ele-
vatOr, and the Railroad Commissioners
Says 1t Can Be Shipped from Wagons.

A. Marvel, Esq, General Manager st. Paul,
Minneapolis & Manitoba Railroad:
SIR: The question involved in the CON-
plant at Benson is one of general application,
and must, therefore, be considered in its larger
aspects. The situation is briefly this: There
are two elevators in Benson, on your track,
receiving and shipping grain according to
your regulations. In addition to these, W. L.
Wells has q warehouse at that place of 10000
bushels capacity, not on your track, but upon
his own ground.
He is an independent buyer Of wheat desir-
ing the privilege of shipping by the car load
on'cars furnished by your company, on your
side tracks, loading from wagons. Mr.. Wells
has enjoyed this privilege for some time, by
the assent of your company. You have
notified him, however, that you no longer
desire him to ship wheat under these con-
ditions, holding it to be an Inconvenience
which has caused you to 'make general
regulation applicable to all such places in re-
gard to size of elevators and warehouses;"
and the location of the same.
Further, that you do not ''deem his request
that it furnished him with cars on side-track
| III WHICH W lOdQ lIOm WdROuo III Ootiht Al ohy
respect reasonable or proper. therefore,
you have required of him as condition OF his
further shipping grain from that station, that
he shall build an elevator OF $4,000 bushels
capacity, or more, on the companys ground.
First-As to the public policy of the condi-
tions you would enjoin: 1t is more than
doubtful if railroad companies should have
the power to prescribe the size and location
OF buildings shlpI ,rs or their lines shall use.
A cfrso the RIGHTS and nrlvi-
ieges of the general public by the authority
of a common carrier, would wholly change
the proper relation between the two. The ex-
ercise OF such an authority would subject ship
pers to control by the railways in such
manner as to destroy their Independence. 1t
is especially to be desired that all elevators
shall be free from any control by the railway
companies.
Were such control or dictation permitted,
the general public would believe that some
sort of co-partnership existed between the
railroads and the elevators. l am informed
by the citizens of Benson that Mr.. Wells is
an INDEPENDENT buyer OF wheat In that market.
He buys for his mills on its merit, irrespective
of grades sought to be established. The in
dependent buyer is, in truth, the factor who
regulates the local price OF wheat, and his
existence should always be encouraged as
matter of public policy.
Just as, in larger sense, the little wheat
we sell in Liverpool controls and regulates The
price of the entire crop. just in like manner,
does the independent local buyer regulate the
local price of wheat. Not only should the
independent local buyer be encouraged by
equal shipping privileges, but the farmer him.
self should have the privilege OF loading car,
and shipping it at any time. Your proposed
regulation would deny the farmer this right.
Farmers as a rule do not ship wheat, but
they should not be debarred the right. Local
prices may be unsatisfactory and they may
therefore desire to ship on their own account.
The elevators may conspire against them;
from this they might have no deliverance, If
they did not possess the privilege OF shipping.
The mere fact that all independent parties
have the open privilege Of shipping will always
prevent monopoly by those running elevators.
Every consideration, therefore, of public policy
would open the evident privilege to those de-
string to ship wheat. Railroads ought to
have no other interest in the matter other
than to receive a reasonable rate for trans
portation. To force shippers to build eleva-
TORS would make monopoly of the mode of
shipping and in effect would cause few men
to own all the elevators. The tendency that
way is now sufficiently strong, and nothing
should be done to give it greater encourage.
ment. 20,
The man of limited means should come to
the common carrier on the same footing as
his better equipped neighbor 1t is their safe
refuge from popular storms.
Now while we would insist on the largest
shipping privileges for the general public, the
public itself must be reasonable. The man
with one bushel or one wagon load of wheat
would not expect and should not receive the
same facilities as the man who ships car
load. The road regulations themselves pre-
vent this, for car-lot rates are much less than
they are for small lots. This fact is proven
tive of the difficulties you seem to apprehend
in that direction. Not only so but neither
this office nor public sentiment would sus-
tain unreasonable demands on the part OF
shippers, no more than unreasonable restrlc
tiops on the part of common carriers. What
ever reasonable regulations the railroads find
to be necessary in order to practically han
die their cars, with view to promptly
and efficiently serving the public.
should be cheerfully complied with by ship
pers. i the absence OF any controlling statute,
railroad regulation should be reasonable,
and consonanG with the general public good.
Second-As to the law of the case: A rail-
road company's regulations cannot rise above
the statutes. The provisions of law govern.
ing such cases will be found as follows: Sec.
Is, page IS; sec. 81, page $50; and sec. 10,
page 1Ol1, G.. s. 1878 These statute
provisions of the common law rule appli-
cable to common carriers. AS principle,
every railway is q common carrier, and is,
therefore, under obligations to receive and
ship all grain offered. The railways cannot
have choice of customers. There can be no
very desirable that elevators should be erected
for the better accommodation of the
public, and that persons embarking
their money in such enterprises
should receive some assurance of protection.
But even this consideration of seeming good
policy cannot take away, or in any manner
impair the legal rights of other parties. Rail-
roads, like the inn keepers, must take ell that
comes till the quarters are full
ulation it is practically said to the applicant,
that unless he builds an elevator of 10000
bushels capacity he will be de-
MED the privilege of shipping
grain on your line No such regulation
can be held to be a reasonable one, nor suf-
ficent excuse for refusal to carry. (Schoul-
er's Bailments, 365. Story on Bailments, 15S.)
The rule laid down by Kent Com. 500 which
is the general principle since followed by the
dertake generally and not as a
casual occupation, and for all people
indiferently, to carry goods and
deliver them at a place appointed, for
here, as business and with or without
special agreement as to price.
AS they hold themselves to the
world as common carriers for a reasonable
compensation, they assume to do and are
bound to do what is required of them in the
course of their employment, if they have the
requisite convenience to carry and are offered
reasonable customary price, and if they re-
fuse without some just ground, they are
liable to an action" You can therefore make
no restrictions upon your common law obli-
cations to carry s'for all people indifferently."
The decisions of the courts uniformly sustain
this principle. Inability to furnish cars to
meet the demands of business at Benson would
be justification in refusing them to Mr..
Wells. But he would be entitled to his pro-
portion of those which the capacity of your
rolling stock did leave for your patrons at
that place.
1t is true that it may be, and unquestiona-
bly, is, practical Inconvenience and some