Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1888-10-31
BitumInOus and Anthracite.

MI uOWdu, tS COUNSEL I0T SO4e DTOS.
Co., the largest individual shippers of an
th1acite coal in the state, has brought
complaint against the Lehigh Valley rail-
road, before the inter. state commission
upon the ground that it charges more fol
carrying anthracite than bituminoul
coal, and that it sells the coal tha
Il mines itself cheaper than tn,
ehippers over its line can sell this latter
result being accomplished by its com.
mand of the railroad tolls. IL can make
; contracts for the delivery of coal and
save itself in its carrying charges; where.
as the individual operators, must pay the
tolls it fixes, and they do not know in the
beginning of the year what they may be
In the end.
There is no doubt that in this respect
great injustice is done to individual
( shippers. The constitution of Pennsyl-
vania gives them perfect remedy in
declaring that railroad companies shall
not be also miners. So far this constiu-
tional prohibition has been dead letter
IN Pennsylvania, owing, we presume,
10 the claim of the corporations
chartered prior to the constitu-
ttons that it cannot restrict them.
We do not believe that this claim is good,
but are firmly convinced that the su.
preme law will be held to bind equally all
the corporations of the state, when it
comes to be conStrpaS. The old doctrine
OF the irrefrHsible and unalterable
character of a public charter needs and
win receive considerable modification in
the light of the later development of
society.
The public welfare is no longer con.
sistent with the maintenance Of the
claim that charter may not be amended
oy the power that granted it, and is not
controlled by constitution subsequently
enacted by the people. Mr.. Gowan, who,
- president of the Reading rail.
road, was the chief offender against
the constitutional prohibition of its
also being a mining company, may
not see this mode of Iedressing the
Ills OF his clients. Possibly he may OBJ
tain satisfaction for them from the inter.
state commission ; though We DO not un-
derstand the ground upon which he
claims that their authority can Compel
the Lehigh railroad to fix rates of freight
Tor Q year ahead, so as to enable indiyi.
dual shippers TO make contracts ahead on
equal terms with the carrying company,
J ust as such requirement may be.
And we are clear that he can get no
redress, and deserves none, upon his other
complaint, that the rates on bituminous
coal are lower than on anthracite coal.
They ought to be lower; otherwise anthra.
cite coal would have monopoly of
spe seau,ard market, TO which it is closer.
Theclaim always has bean in behalf of
enthraciLe that its peculiar quality and
e4ceiience enable it to defy the competi-
ton OF bitum'nols coal and this is a
good claim. Ii anthracite coal WAS not
lntrinslcaliy worth more than bitumi.
nous, 1t would not be mined
because 1t is more costly to mine
AZ cannot be put on the market as
cheaply as bituminOus coal at the same
rates Of freight. Mr.. Gowen's clients
value their coal lands away above the
value of b.tuminous coal lands. Tie
owners OF anthracite get four times as
much royalty as the owners of bituminous
coal. The two are entirely different arti-
c'es; and there is no more reason for max,
~ the same freight rate on them than
ba1e V for making a like rate on iron
md cotton goods. IL the railroads are
Permitted to classify their freight, they
Rnnot be withheld from putting btu
~ nous and anthracite coal in separate
0y.
,.he fact is that the freight rate on
.'.u..'s coal to the sea coast is higher
.ak. be considering the cost OF
I,.. s the lakes the distance