Omaha daily bee., 1884-08-13
CHEAP RAILROAD FL RES
Suggestions From the Details of Brit.
ish Passenger Business I'm 1888.

American railroad managers should
take a hint from the results of the Brit
ish passenger business In 1883, says the
New York Journal of Commerce, Run
ming first, second, and third classes o.
cars to accommodate various castles ant
tastes the various British railroad com
panies ind at the end of the year tina
the lowest grade Is by far the most pro
ductive.in earnings. The official stalls
tics for 1883 show the receipts from thirc
class matter to have been G17, 050, 100
against f3,329, 700 second class, ano
CO, 679, 100 first-class. The gain in third
class for the year over the returns fol-
1882 is about goo, 600, and the first and
second classes exhibit a loss in the com
parison. The third class receipts are
nearly three times as great as those OF
| the other two classes together. This is
an unanswerable argument In favor OF
cheap travel. 1t explains In part why
the net earnings of the British railroads
for 1883 amounted to 4.29 per cent on
an increased capital,-a result unexpect-
eddy good. The statistics do not give the
comparative cost of running the three
kinds of cars In which these passengers
were carried, but there is no
doubt that the figures, If obtained, would
be greatly In favor Of the cheapest class.
The third class cars are always crowded,
the second clsss are only partly full and
the first class on the mixed trains either
go empty or carry much less than their
complement of passengers. The prime
cost of the better class Of cars Is, of course
much higher than the third, and the
wear and tear make a larger bill of o K
pense for refurnishing. If the ~predudic.
es of the people did not support this dis
t~inction In cars the companies would long
sgo have abolished the classification and
adopted the American plan.
The American railroad corporations
have yet to learn by thorough and sys-
tematic trials to how low a point fares
can be put so as to produce the largest
net earnings. 1t Is invariably the csse
that those roads which do the most lib
eral committing business earn the most
money from passengers. They reduce
the fare in consideration of the fact that
the passenger makes daily trips But on
each trip the company must make a prof
1t or else the more 1t commutes the more
1t would lose. Now, If 1t pays to take
people at reduced rates between two
points by the month or for the round
trip, why would 1t not also pay to make
that rate applicable to everybody without
regard to the number of tripsl This ex-
pertinent has never been tried except at
times when the public has demanded and
almost forced 1t from the companies, as
in the case of the great Philadelphia
exposition and other national fairs.
The dividends in the years
when these fairs where held indicated no
decline In net earnings of the companies
most affected by the reduced rates, and
until the contrary is proven we are enti-
tied to suppose that the experiment was
successful. But no company In the
United States has ever had the courage
and faith to introduce really cheap rates
of fare at all times and seasons, with or
without competition as an melting cause.
Rivalry may make fares to Chicago, Gin
cinnati or st. Louis very low for a time,
but the companies soc come to an under
standing and r~e.establish uniform higher
rates. What the people want Is more
reasonable rates to non-competing points,
not Communication or excursion tickets,
but Internationally cheap fares. We
believe there's "moneV in 1t" to an ex-
tent of which the companies little dream.