Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1883-01-30
ID "A I1 K
POST INTELLIGENCER.
the AsTEnONOPsLY CRY IN Eng
LAND.

TIE AsTf.MON0PsLY CRY IN ENE-
LAND.
The charging of diferential rates Tor
railway carriage, which led some years
AGO to the Granger movement IN the
West, and is cause of continual aRita-
ton in this country, provokes quite as
much complaint and opposition IN Great
Britain. The case aQainst the railways
was very strongly pressed before com
mittee of the House of Commons dur
ING the late session of Parliament, and
II is interesting to compare tie grew |
ances set forth by British merchants
and PRODUCERS, with those which are 80
strenuously urged upon American leeis-
lators.
To begin with the complaints OF
farmers and manufacturers, We learn
that foreign grain is carried from Liver
nool at lower rates than English grain,
and thrt American beeves and meat are
transported from Glasgow to the me
tropolis for less than Scotch cattle and
Scotch meat. Again, cattle brought
from central or eastern Europe to New
castle are conveyed, it seems, to LAYER
pool for less than the charges levied on
native cattle forwarded from the coun-
ties of Northumberland and Durham.
So, too, the great hopproducing county
Of Ken. has to pay more to send its
great staple to London than 1t costs to
bring foreign hops from Boulogne or
Finishing, The Staffordshire iron mas
tiers are Indignant because the railway
companies carry goods between the iron
districts of Wales or Durham on the
ore hand, and London or Liverpool on
the other, at lower rates than are de-
mauded for the same goods when com
inc from Staffordshire. Ironmongers
point out that Belgian wire and other
wares are brought all the way from Bel
GUM to Birmingham for less than It
costs TO carry similar goods from BIZ
mingham TO London. And makers Of
chemicals were able TO show the Parlia-
mentary committee that they have to
pay for the coal which they use, more
than il charged for the coal sent past
their factories to the seaboard for ex-
portation TO their foreign rivals. Asfor
Irish producers and traders, they might
be expected to suffer grievously from
system Of rates graded by English car
riers and the fact is that English goods
are forwarded to Irish towns for less
than is charged for Irish goods carried
over n far shorter distance. For exam
pie, Burton ale is carried 2a miles for
$1.62, whereas Dublin porter has to pay
1915 for 124 miles. 1t Ii natural that
these and other startling examples of
preferential rates should excite great
deal Of discomfort on the part Of pro-
ducers, and that the demand for the Gu
forcement of equal treatment by legis
hilton should be quite as popular in the
United Kingdom as in tho United States
The defences set up by the British
railways for their svstems of diiforen-
tial charges are analogous TO those with
which we are familiar in this country.
II Is said, for instance, that American
grain Ii carried by rail from Liverpool
to London at lower mileage rates
than are charged for grain grown on
English soil, because it would otherwise
90 to London directly from America by
sea, or by coastwise steamer from Liver
pool. Imported meat, we are told, goes
by rail from Glasgow to London for less
than Scotch meat, for the same reason.
b, too, If it costs less to transport hops
10 London from Boulogne than from
Canterbury, this is because If higher
rates were charged the staple would be
conveyed by sea to the British metropo-
lis. These are alleged to be good reasons
for preferential rates by the advocates
of railways-among whom, by the way,
the Fortnightiy seems TO ilgure-becarsc
the companies would lose the favored |
traffic altogether if they were not at
liberty to compete with marine carriers
by lowering their charges. The railway
corporations undertake. moreover, To
pose as public benefactors by showing
that differential rates often inure to the |
benefit Of the consumers. They insist, |
Tor instance, that without preferential |
tariff fish from Scotland or Ireland, or |
oven the distant parts of England. |
could not compete in the markets OF |
London with fish fromRamsga.e. Again. |
milk comes to London from remote dis
tricts, while IL it were charged accord |
ing to distance the supply would be |
checked and the price would rise.
The argument, however, upon which |
the British railway companies mainly |
rely u that they are traders, ard that it |
y unfair to treat them differently from |
other traders. No one complains, they
say, Of a merchant or manufacturer be-
cause be makes more profit out of one |
class OF dealings than out of another. |
To which tho obvious answer is that the |
railway companies have Parliamentary
privileges, and ARE, in the majority of
cases, and 90 far, at all events. as local
sfaiiic u concerned, monopolists. Thus
far tho history of the agitation against
preferential rates in England is almost
identical with the record Of the move
ment In the United States. But now lot |
Us see how English courts have inter.
presed the clause inserted in the charter
OF every railway company in the United |
Kingdom, BY which "undae preference"
u prohibited. The ground taken by the
AYnnnnx}Apa - 4, n.