The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-05-12

|
profitable railroad business of all the
great trunk lines consists of local
freights; that the through freights con-
stitute a very small-ten-per cent OF
the total business, and much smaller
per cent of the profits;. that conse-
quently, as simple business PROPOSE
ton, if the railroad companies by legis-
lation shall be compelled to choose
between the profits of the local and of
the through business, the through bust
ness will be sacrificed and the local
business retained; in other words, the
railroad companies will prefer profits
to losses. Mr.. Spooner's argument is
that the through freight rates are the
result of competition; that they are es-
tabished at the minimum of profit, and
are frequently less than the actual cost;
that, however, if the companies are
compelled to make the charges for the
long haul proportionately as high as the
charges for the short haul it will be the
rate of the long, or least profitable, haul
that will be increased, and the rate of
the short, or most profitable, haul that
will be retained. The result will be an
actual increase in the cost of transport
tation between the East and the West
on the trunk lines. If the through
rates are to go up, of course the land of
the western farmer would be less valu-
able and his crops would not command
as high prices. Mr.. Spooner believed
in the necessity of legislation to prevent
the admitted extortions of railroad COM
panies, but did not think that this could
be accomplished through the principle
of the long and short haul.
Most of the republican senators who
spoke on the subject took the same
ground. Mr.. ingalls, said the effect
would be to put up long hauls to local
or short haul rates; it would add to the
cost of all western products that the
eastern farmer has to buy, while it
would compel the western farmer to
paw additional cost for coal and manu-
| featured articles from the East. Mr..
Hoar denounced it as provision to
drive the American farmer from the
European market. Mr.. Blair expressed
the opinion that the practical enforce
ment of the Camden provision would
add twenty-five per cent to the ordi-
nary expenses of the necessaries of life
to the working, the manufacturing, the
laboring people throughout the Eastern
States. Mr.. Brown showed how the
railroads would probably meet the re-
quircment to charge no more for short
than long haul. He said "Nine-
tenths of their business is local. They
must fix their through rates so that
they will not charge less for long haul
than for a short haul. This bill en-
acted into a law would of course put
them to thinking how they will conduct
their business. Nine-tenths of it be-
ing local and one-tenth of it being
through business they would simply
make a reasonable advance upon their
through business, and the advance
would be high enough in all probable
ity to cut off that through business, but
the same advance would be made also
upon the local business. The through
business, one-tenth, they would raise
in the same proportion that they raised
the nine-tenths of local business. What
would be the result? They would make
nine times as much as they would lose
by disseminating the through business
and raising the rate on local business. "
Some of the points brought out in this
debate are worthy of special considera-
ton. 1t appears that the through bust
ness of railroads is subject to competi-
tive influences beyond the jurisdiction
of state, and they cannot safely be
bound by regulations that would ham,
per them in this competition for a share
of the business. If they were COM
PEELED to make their local rates within
the state conform to the pro rata stand.
ard based on the present through rates
they could not profitably do the loca'
business; and they cannot raise theil
; through rates so as to make pro ratio
local charges profitable without sacri
fcing their through business. The
effect of this result would be to increase
local rates, as from them their entire
revenue would have to be drawn. L
will be seen, therefore, that the prob
lem of regulating railway transporta
ton by law is not easy of solution, bu