Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-01-17
LONG AND SHORT HAULS.
MIR. BROWN OPPOSES THE IN
TER-STATE COMMERCE BILL.

lNON InG
solution of the Railroad PrOblem-A
Rattling Debate Over Mr.. Slater's
Amendment-The Other News at the
National Capital.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 16.-At . O'Clock
to-day the Chair laid before the Senate
the interstate commerce bill, and the
debate on it consumed the remainder Of
the days session. The question pending
was Mr.. Slater's amendment, providing
that no greater charge should be made
for short haul than for long haul when
the longer haul included the shorter
route.
Mr.. Van WYck opened the discussion
in long prepared speech upon the gen
eral subject of government control Of
railroads.
Mr.. Mcpherson regarded as unconsti-
tutlOnal the pending amendment of Mr.
slater, which would prohibit inter-
state railroads from charging any
greater compensation for transporting
similar amount and kind of property a
shorter than for a longer distance. 1t
would give some roads power TO bank
rupt and ruin their rivals. The New
York Central and Pennsylvania being
each supreme in one State would, under
the proposed amendment, be able to ruin
thD A4AlCf DdlIAIOlG duNl OUlOs lAGulEu
Valley, Delaware and Lackawana, West
Shore, and all roads whose tracks were
confined to one State could ruin inter-
State roads.
Mr.. SLATER'S OPPOSITE VIEW.
Mr.. Slater cOntrOverted this point. Con-
gress would do its duty, he said, by
adopting this amendment, and If under
any of the provisions of the bill any means
of Injustice should be resOrted to that did
not come specifically under the provision
of the bill, separate States would be ap-
pealed TO by the parties affected, and the
states would undoubtedly see that such
injustice was removed.
Mr.. Ingalls, said that the fault he found
with the amendment was that by eX-
pressly denying the right of railroads to
charge more for short haul than for a
long one, it legalized the practice of
charging as much for a short haul as for
a long one.
Mr.. George proposed to amend the
amendment of Mr.. Slater so as to remove
any implication of the legaliZatiOn re-
ferred to by Mr.. Ingalls,.
Mr.. Georges amendment provided that
MIR. Slater's proposed amendment ''shall
not be construed to legalize charging as
much for shorter as for 4 longer dis
tance in any case"
Mr.. Georges amendment was agreed
to, as modifying Mr.. Slater's amendment,
the latter, however, not being part of the
bill, but still under debate.
SENATOR BROWNS VIEWS.
Mr.. Brown said that at about the time
when the first railroad was established
between Manchester and Liverpool, Eng
land, lot of two and half acres of
land on the site of the present city of At
/ -lanta was sold for a horse, a saddle, and
a bride. That lot now bore more than
S15,0O0,0 600 worth of property. The differ
ence in value, he said, had been created
by railroads. 1t was easy to excite people
against railroads, but he was addressing
himself to cOOl-headed men, the brave
Senator's who represented the people.
lie asked no privileges for railroads. but
asked that something like justice be done
to them. They should have tair play.
Bir. Brown then entered upon an elabOr-
ate analysis and discussion of the ques-
tiOn of railroad charges and management.
The competitive system, he said, had been
virtually abandoned in England. 1t had |
never been recognized much in France.
In Germany the government was taking |
hold of the railroads so as to control COM !
petition.
CONSOLIDATION THE SOLUTION.
Consolidation, not competition, was the |
solution of the railroad question. That |
was the policy of England, whose states |
manShip lowered like a great pyramid |
upon the PLAINS of time. When the people |
nowadays wanted railroads built, popular |
orators made speeches, men applauded |
and ladies waved their handkerchiefs |
Every possible inducement was given to |
men to invest money in the enterprise, |
but no sooner was the road built than the |
whole tenor of popular sentiment |
changed, and those who had not put a |
dollar i2to its construction joined in a |
crusade for its cOnfscatiOn. Referrin |
to the question of uniform rates
of charges, Mr.. Brown said that |
local freights were compelled to carry for |
the same rates as the great trunk lines /
they would be unable to keep in running |
order and would have to 90 into bank |
ruptcy. The legislation proposed would |
greatly discourage the building of rail- |
roads. There may be enough Of them in |
the North and West. Those sections may |
have enough game in this to be able to |
afford to pull the trigger. 1t was not so
with the South, which yet needed rail- |
roads. If the present bill passed the peO- |
pie who were now clamOring for |
its passage would soon be |
found clamOring for its repeal. |
1t would either drive the railroads into |
bankruptcy or else it would prohibit all |
interchange of commodities at a greater |
distance than 800 or 600 miles, as statis- |
tics quoted by Mr.. Brown showed that |
freight could not possibly bear the same |
proportiOnate rate for 1000 miles. 1t |
would not only destroy Interstate COM |
merce, but by making lOng-distance |
freIghts from the West to the Atlantic |
coast so expensive as to prohibit ship |
ment, it would also destroy our foreign |
commerce. At o'clock MIR. Brown |
yielded for motion to adjourn, Mr.. Cul- |
lOm giving notice that he would tomorrow |
ask the Senate to sit until the bill was |
completed, which proposition, however, |
met with several protests, especially |
from Mr.. Beck, who did not think it could |
be disposed of so soon. The Senate then |
at 5:10 O'Clock adjourned.