The record-union., 1892-09-03
COMPETITION AND COMMERCIAL.
TERRITORY.

The San Francisco CdU consumes a
half column of space to explain, in reply
TO the RECoRD-UNIoN, what it means by
commercial territory naturally belong
ing to San Franciscov-a claim that we
pronounced absurd. The CGU now ex-
plains that what is meant is territory in
which San Francisco can sell, under GER
tain conditions, cheaper than can Eastern
houses. 1t admits that mo city has a
right to sell goods in any territory which
is not held subject to it's ability to sell
more cheaply than competing cities"
The Cdu thus gives away its case. Its
explanatory statement, quoted above, is
accepted as true-it is, indeed, precisely
what the RECoRD-UNIoN has repeatedly
said in discussing this question of com
mercial competition. But the CaU re-
turns to its wallow by saying that the
trouble is that rail and steamer carriers
combine on common goods rate to San
francisco from the eastern source of
supply, while the rail carriers bring the
same class of goods from the East to
points less distant than San Francisco at
less rates, and hence San Francisco is
shut out of territory in which she
might otherwise sell.
The explanation does not explain. The
sea is free highway San Francisco has
1t in her power to use it at will; her cap
ital is equal to it; but no ability or right
on her part can deprive places between
the East and San Francisco, which are
competitive points, from receiving their
goods at no greater or even less charge
than the rate to the farther points. The
claim is repeated that the local rates from
San Francisco are so high as to prevent
her maintaining her position as chief
distributor. But, while the local rates
are not higher than warranted, it seems
to be beyond the capacity of the C6rH to
understand that whatever the rate bv sea
the rail-carriers in competition with it
must meet it or lose the trade. In doing
so they must give the interior competi-
tive points the benefit of such meeting of
the rates, and hence San Francisco would
not be better off than she now is, so long
as the rates from the East to California
are not of a protective order.
1t comes to this then, as we long ago
said, what San Francisco really wants is
high rates overland on goods coming
westward, and low rates on like goods
coming into her port from the East by
water With such an arrangement. or
disarrangement, of commercial laws, San
Francisco could be made supremely
happy, and the interior proportionately
subservient to her and to whatever mar
gin of profit she might choose to exact.
No matter how ingeniously the Cali
and its coadjuators may state the case.
the simple fact remains, and must re-
main, that places east of San Francisco
which are competitive points cannot be
deprived of their right to buy in the At
lantie markets and ship direct to them
selves, except rail carriers refuse to meet
water competition and maintain in the
interest of San Francisco and to the dis
advantage of all others a high protective
freight tariff, or a larger unit of trans
portation than the carload-lot-one so
large that interior points could not avail
of it. Whatever the local rates may be.
or ought to be, or are, cuts no particular
figure in the case. A low rate on ont
going commodities or products of the
country is what all desire, and what
must be given as rapidly as conditions
permit. The carrying out of products
cheaply assists us to find markets; the
bringing in of supplies cheaply assists us
in producing.
What the mercantile class of San Fran
cisco is seeking for is not cheap rates of
freight in the interest of the producer on
his outgoing products, and cheap rate
on his incoming supplies, but in the in
terest of widening the margin of profit
between the cost of the goods-and which
necessarily includes the freight-and the
price at which they can be sold. We re-
peat for the hundredth time, there is not
and cannot be any community of interest
between the producers of California |
products and the importers of merchan-
disc to be used here. 1t is not given to |