Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1890-05-26
s0vercharges.

The following oor.e poaderce regarding
the oyerchargs for gssia ahipped f;on
Chicago 10 THE city, OF wnica mention vas
made last week il tie GAZETTE. explains
itself. 1t also shows that the Board o: Trade
is alive to the inte.es;e Of the oty, and a!1o
that the officers of tbs R & D. r. e., srs in
no wise to blame for tbs oYefohhfge:
May, 21, 1890
C. M Borum esq G. Z. Agent, Lynchblrg.
Dear Slr: Tae attention Of the Board of
Trade has teen called TO q controversy Or
misunderstanding which hiss arisen between
tbs re ceivers of Western grain va gour ilaes.
and the undersigned have been appointed a
committee 20 correspond with ycu upon ihe
subject, with the hope of SO adjusting the
matter in dispute as to ayolG trouble IL the
future, end 10 establish the integrity OF g
bill OF adlng bey ond doubt.
The case in point Is This Walter Roberts,
of this city, holds bill of ladjng Issued at
Chicago, on the TIA Inst By tie C!eveiend,
Cincinnati, Chicago. anG Ct Louie railwsy
company. fer B & o. car, No 1892, contain
ing 1920 pounds coro; It ieciles This
bill of seding coawacs rates from Rutland
to Alexandra 19c uar 100 lbs. The goods
are conEigned to order Notify Walter
Roberts
MIR. Roberts on s,,lSal Of The car,
rendered bis certified check for the
amount Of freight due Sc expressed in the
bill OF adin2. 20 Wit 46, 200 lbs ct 19o per
100 lbs, SS7.7S. Delivery of the osr was re-
fuaed unless ne freight bill presented by your
agent here was paid, IL bsing largely in ex-
oess of the agreed rate, to will S113.lS, an
oveYccarge of $25 40.
Mr. Roberts having paid the draft at
tachea TO the bill of lading, thereby scquif-
ing actual oWDerdhip Of the property, Ia our
opinion very properly refused 70 pay the ex-
oessive charge e1d throws upon the tesmi
nal company the responsibility OF tho IN
lawful detention Of the property, whioh IN
der tbs original contract be is justly entitled
to rece!ve promptly oa It's arrgel here.
L seems to US that tho transportation
con- pany has nc right TO demand more com
psnsetion than thes c0ntracted 20 recei7e,
and that this demand og their part is uI-
reasonable and pernicious 10 the exterame.
affecting end ursettiag Ell the well eatae-
ilshsd cuaioms and practices Of business and
violating the HBcrad ness Of Dill OF iadlng,
which has, 30 far as we arc informed, been
elways considered on inviolable doo9 ment
which d merchant could With seiety negotl-
ate. w are very en&lodo tual tnis i.ApVtoi
shall be amicably adjusted snG that g rule
shall be established which will prevent SIM
liar disputes ia the future. We therefore re-.
spectiully request sou to give the matter I'M
mediate and careful consideration.
We further desire 10 say we attach 20
blame to your agent here, Mr. D0uelas, or
to any OF the officials of youy company. They
have been uniformly courteous, and ge are
sure that iu the course they have pursued
that shey bave acted under rigid instruction,
which they were not ct liberty to disobeg.
With considerations OF highest personal
regard we have the honor to be, very re-
speotfuly, +. g; REED,
President Board of Tred9.
ISAAC EICHBBRG,
Chan Com. on r. R T. and I.
p. 5. We cite this case only. Il is pprtsc-
ularly aggrevatipg to Nj. ": Z. but is only
r,nnx, mo oap rnpi.e If napoSlary