New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-05-05
PENNSYLVANIA'S POSITION.
PRESIDENT ROBERTS on THE COAL COMBlNA-
TON AND COAL RATES

PROJECTION ASD INCREASING PRICES

1lS tDMPNNf DOE MI Bib4r-' = ~ 'C'A-'
PRODUCTION ASD IYCREAsING PRICES.
Philadelphia May Am interview with PRESIDENT
Roberts, Of The PENNSYLVANIA Railroad Company WIS
lad TO-DAY. in which he gave the foilowhg answers
TO questions asked him concerning the PehhsyN"hh'
Railroads position:
Mr. Roberts. In your recent Interview AUyou
expressed freely Your Judgment to the 'Oursc
through rates over trunk lines and Western lines WOMB
be- likely TO take. so fur yOur Judgment In r'SPV" W
these rates seems to have been )ustihen p' '"c IT,
suits II Is said TO be admitted now that therc II
general disturbance OF through rates all over inc
country and that their general course Is downward'
In that interview. however. you did not give any
positive expression OF your views on coal rates. ana
thc public would be glad to know II tuee Is any
reason why you should not express yonr opinion on
that subject also.
Mr. Robers-I see no reason WHY should not rs
NV vieTs have been well known Tor seVerat yours
past. have been able to close nv eve" W ,'o
fuct that sooner or later the disparity be'"eeh o'-
luminous and anthracite rates would cause uo"o.c W
the anthracite carriers. who also carriers vi VI
luminous coal. and that sooner or later an cduan1a'
zion Of the rates on both classes Of coal wouid DO
forced upon them. The mites received for carrying
bitumlnous coal not over two-'hroS OF thc i"'o'
per ton per mile that an.hncltc coal Is PAYING yet
bltumInous cal rates are considered fairly remuncra
tive The conclusion reached By the Interstate Com
Commission
against the Legh Valley also seemed to Indicate thar
,he tro rates must be brought closer together.
rut Mr. Roberts, It Is understood that the
ounstlon now presented Is not rs to the mamie
nance OF those rates which the Interstate commerce
Commission declared 10 be too hgh but II IS poposed
TO advance the price OF Anthracite COAL which wond
OF course involve an OF the rates for carrying
It, VIII you give the public the benefit OF your opinion
on that subjectl
Il ts,c turayc 80
company as far as possible, to manage It's traiic IN
harmony with It's competitors. aud our recent ncuoh
simply made our rates conform as nearly Us possible
to those which then being charged by otner INES
by our competitors OF making the rate bear certain
relative proportion Ia the selling price Of the COAL al
have been prevailing. and II seemed to me to tend
toward propor jnate reduction IN ue co,t VI u t
IN advance in the price 81 coal. forced by curoil-
the production. fear II would be imprecucH-
Die Tor our company o is 70 Adolf rs we have
never any time been In harmony with TIE poncy OF
restricting production for the purpose OF advancing e
price Of commodity and the Interests Of our company
are THOSE OF transporter whose object " is 10 sun
late the production OF articles. rather tth esV''c'
them. 49,, .. ,,
Then. Mr.. Roberts. won do not think 1t woua
be the interests OF your company or OF anS
to adopt the policy that seems now 10 be pursued IN
the anthracite business 81 restricting the @
and advancing the price to the consumer Tor he PVT PVT
pose OF getting better price for the coal at the pits
mOlth aud higher mites for transportation
Mr. Roberts, do not believe, rs already satcn,
that II Is 10 the interest Of the public or OF any
rnfIway company engaged I'm Its legitimate business
as a tran sportor become owners II coal properly,
so rs to bring them both tranSporters and pro
iucors into antagonsm with the Interests or the com
munity This policy. however. having obtained among
the larger companies, tho Pennsylvania Railroad Com
pany was compelled previous TO my administration 10
acouIre some anthracite cal property for the pro
econ Of It's customers IT, lines well ns Us trans
rprilng Interests. This policy has been studiotsy
avoided Since far II possible to do 10
AZ the present tine the manufacturing Interests ~ The
country rs well as the mining Industries In n de-
pressed condition and II Srens 10 b. necessity In me
htunnos traffic we'll In the iron Industries. for
the transporter 10 make concessions In VARIETY 81
way In the cndeavOr Ia keep those industries IN
productive condition. The policy now proposed. ns
| understa nd u, In the handling Of the anthracite
product To- b" tho reverse ~ this and would mean
an crdcavcr higher prices for the anthracite
coal which l. necessary To many or our indlstrlhl
interests and also higher prices for the transportation
thereof hy curtang the product This certainly seems
to io n very unwise policy 10 pursue. .
n would BE- concluded irpm this them Tint
your company Is not prepared to Joan the recent
anthracite combination In It's proposed methodist
Mr.. KO,crtS-So, sir. our company Goes not ~
Hove that II is either % the Interests OF the pnbnc
or ~ ~ shareholders become n party Ia cninbna
ton which proposes 20 restrict the production OF
the commercial prosperity OF the country. We be
ievc that any such policy must inevitably result In
arravng The public and the constituted authorities en-
trusted With the cnforC cncnt OF the laws against the
companies which pursue sllch policy and In disaster
IN all cOrpOrnfo Interests.