The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1882-01-14
NO DISCRIMINATION.

The Rock Island ARGUS is dissatisfied
with the railroad and warehouse commits
sions, because they have recently stated
that no discrimination must be made be
tween shippers. We have not observed
this statement of the commissioners. We
cannot believe they ever made such state
ment; and If they did, they can find JUS
tification for it in the railroad laws under
which they are acting
In the celebrated Mclean county case,
IN which the Chicago & Alton railroad
company was the defendant, the offense
charged was discrimination against Lexing-
ton in favor of Bloomington, in this that
the railroad company charged more for
hauling lumber from Chicago than it
charged for hauling lumber from Chicago
to Bloomington. a greater distance. It
was held that this discrimination might be
just discrimination. The court argued
that there might be a good reason why this
railroad company could afford to haul
freight to Bloomington at a lower rate
than to Lexington, and ii said, in iIlustrat-,
ing this proposition, that the business done
by the road at Lexington might require it
to haul loaded cars to that place and then
haul them away empty; while the
business at Bloomington might be of
a character that would enable the
road to haul car loads of lum-
Der to that place and haul them away load
ed with other kinds of freight. The court
held that under such circumstances the
railroad company would have been justified
in charging less to Bloomington than to
Lexington, the shorter distance. The rule
laid down by the court was, in short, that
Just determinations was allowable but that
unjust Determinations should not be al
lowed.
Under this decision the railroad law now |
n force was enacted The men who wrote |
-he law tested, by this decision, every sen
sence that they wrote. They had the deci-
'ion constantly before them. They in eff /
feet enacted Lawrence's opinion into law. |
Therefore, if the commissioners have |
said there must be discrimination between /
patrons of any railroad in the state, they
nave declared a rule without a statute /
behind it, and it cannot stand; but if they
lave said there must be no unjust discrim
nation against any patrons of any place
IN any road by any road, they have only |
'eiterated the clear provision of the |
statute, which has been rule of com
non law as applied to common carriers
or centuries, aud as applicable in /
his day to railroad common CARR
RS as it was, to the old time freight,
wagon of the old-time English highway,
The rule of the law is, that a railroad must
reat all its patrons alike-that, if it does
or one patron service, it must do for
very other patron an identical service for
lnjustly discriminate in favor of or against
my person or place. And this is just
ule which all railroads should be COM
'elled to observe. ~ Bloomington BaIletin
That there should be no discrimination
etween two shippers of the same point is
9th right and just; but the attitude taken
y the ARGUS is that there is defect in
be Law inasmuch as the commissioners
ave decided that there must be no dis
Elimination between localities. Under our
law a railroad must make its
harges along its route proportionate to the
istance travelled, and in consequence the
.rger shipping points are now suffering
eavy advance in rates.