Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-06-14
THE RAILROAD DISPUTE.
Decision of the Board of Arbitration at
Chicago.

Decision of the Board of Arbitration at
Chicago.
by Telegraph
CHICAGO, June 13th.-The three arbitra-
tors-E. b. Thomas, Hugh Riddle and l..
Z. Vining-who, for the past few days,
have been hearing both sides III the contro-
versy between the Atlantic and Pacific and
the Southern Pacific Railway Companies.
growing out Of the transcontinental var,
rendered their decision this afternoon. The
Atlantic and Pacific Compapy's line termi-
mates at Mojave, and for the past two years
there has been contract between that COM
pany and the Southern Pacific Company,
by which the Atlantic and Pacific Company
was allowed 10 do business with San Fran
cisco by using the Southern Pacific line
from Mojave to that city A dispute arose
after the disruption of the transcontinental
pool in February over the division of the
earnings between the two companies. The
contract governing this business was made
in 1884, and provided that the Southern
Pacific Company should have for its share
Of the Atlantic and Pacific through freight
and passenger rates its mileage pro rata OF
such through rate as may be established
from time TO time by any of the through
lines competing for through traffic"
When the Transcontinental pool broke
up the Atlantic and Pacific Company
claimed the right to meet any rate which
its competitors might make and thar the
Southern Pacific Company was obliged un-
der the contract to take its mileage pro rata
Of any low rate that might be made to meet
! the competition of other lines. This claim
the Southern Pacific refused to allow
claiming that the only established rates
contemplated by the contract was
the one established by the Trans
continental Association. Acting on
this construction of the contract, the South
ern Pacific compelled the patrons and Gus
toners of the Atlantic and Pacific through
line to pay the old-established rates,
thereby forcing the Atlantic and Pacific to
pay back to these the people the difference
between the cut and the old-established
rate.
The Board of Arbitrators in their deci-
sion sustained the position of the Atlantic
and Pacific, holding as follows: Such
through rate as may be established from
time TO time for any through traffic, y
means. and was intended mean, such rate
as may have been given, accepted or per-
mitted to the members of any other
through line, it being the decision of the
arbitrators that the Atlantic and Pacific
Company has the right to make any rate
that may be given, accepted or permitted
by the members OF any OF their through
lines, and that such rates are to be divided
between the Southern Pacific Company and
the Atlantic and Pacific Company upon
the Kansas City and San Francisco mile
age. as provided in the contract
The decision makes it necessary to have
an accounting between the two companies
to ascertain the amount TO be paid the
Southern Pacific by the Atlantic and Pa
cific on its through business since the dis
ruption of the pool The Atlantic and Pa
cific Company was backed in the dispute
by the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe and
the St. Louis and San Francisco companies
who are Joint owners of the line. The ar
bitration attracted unusual attention
among railroad men, because it was be-
lieved settlement of this question would
aid in the final adjustment of the trans
continental difficulties.
Among the prominent officers Of the diff
ferent companies present at the arbitration
were General Traffic Manager Stubs, Gen
eral Passenger Agent Goodwin, Assistant
General Solicitor Raymond of the Southern
Pacific line. The Atlantic and Pacific was
represented by General Manager Robinson,
General Freight and Passenger Agent Bis
sell, and Solicitor Hazledon and Judge
Henry A. Waldo, of Mexico. From the
St. Louis and San Francisco there were
John o. Day and c. w. Smith. George L.
Peck, General Solicitor, and George W.
McCreary, General Counsel, represented
the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe.