The morning call., 1892-03-21


OF say 81 80 per ton, would be S21, 900.
"On railroad actually operating this
number OF locomotives the difference in coal
consumption between July and January re-
Gently was actually 1869 tons excess for
January as compared with July, which, at
the cost stated per ton, did amount to over
$4,000, and there was an average decrease
in cars hauled of 0.59 car per passenger
train and 1.S9 cars per freight train. as COM
pared with july"
Now the Northern Pacific uses just about
the same number OF locomotives as are men
TONED IN the foregoing article. 1t may be
that 1t is the road referred to as spending
S2l,OO0 more month for coal In winter
than IN summer. AS matter Of fact, how
ever. the Northern Pacific's coal costs over
twice 81 30 a ton, which would make the
total over Si2, coo.
Bot coal COSTS more in California than it
does in Minnesota" declare the railroad
people.
Yes, the poor, cheap, soft coal that tie
Northern Pacific burns in Minnesota costs
on an average So 80 ton at the point of dis
tribuion, while for wood the cost is
S3 2152 a cord. The Southern Pacific uses
fair quality Of coal that costs, SO it de-
elares in its reports, Sc IS ton, while its
WOOD costs 81 70 a cord. Now, that Sc lS
ton IS what the coal is supplied for by the
Pacific Improvement Company, which, as is
we'll kn own, is only wheel within wheel
OF the Southern Pacific Company. II that
coal actually costs huntington and STAN
ford 50 ten, il will be q matter Of wonder
ment 1t is surprising to note, however,
how mpeh wood is burned by the Southern
Pacific Company, instead Of coal. Whiie lt
burned, according to its report TO the Rail
road Commissioners for 1890, 542, 010 tons OF
coal, il also burned 14l, 655 cords or wood. IL
reports the cost If the wood at 81 20 cord.
Ii would be interesting 10 know what the
actual cost was.
But suppose it actually pays sc Is ton for
coal Better yet, suppose II actually pays
twice that sum or Sl2 Sc a ton, how does tile
consumption Of cOnl count in To such wond-
erful extent as the railroad people are always
claiming it does? What Is the actual cost
of coal for hauling ton of freight 10
Bakersfield? Surprising ii be a ton OF grain
bags, fur instance. For hauling that freight
to Bakersfield, 800 miles, the company re-
eeves Sl7 r.
Now, the average number Of pounds Of
Iuel consumed per mile by the Southern
Pacific locomotives is reported by the conf
pany at G220. This includes coal as well
as wood-the latter of course being lighter.
1t is not known how much to deduct for
the weight of the wood, but TO give the COM
pany every advantage in the computation,
nothing viii be deducted. Call it 62.20
pounds straight, and all coal at Sl2 SO 4 ton,
or twice a much as il claims 10 pay.
The 62.20 pounds of coal is consumed in
an average miles run over all kinds of
grades, but nothing will be deducted for the
500 miles of almost straight and level track
10 Baker field, so that the quantity OF coal
consumed would lie nine tons, which at
Sl2 So a ton would amount in cost 10 Sill "a
This, of course, is for the whole train. The
Suuth' RI Pacific Company reports the aver
age number of tons of freight in its freight
trains al 1866. This, as VIII be seen, makes
the cost of coal for hauling the single ton of
grain-bagS t. Bakersfield about 50 cents.
Remember this is at the double rate per
ton OF coal, or S12 So. Then, too, the aver
ages used all include the mountain divisions,
where trains are short and two locomotive
are sometimes necessary 10 the train,
whereas in the San Joaquin Valley. over
which the grain-bag run IS made, the road
Is almost as level as a floor.
But what does all this show? Simply
that the cost Of ceal-that great bugbear Of
the Southern Pacific Companv-amounts to
very little when il Is run down and
closely examined. 0ne-half Of so cents is
30 cents. Now we are some eNhere near the
actual cost of coal for carrying the ton of
grain-lags To Bakers field. But we are lib
eTal and Will call i; 30 cents.
Fifty cents cost Cor coal for hauling one
ton If bags 500 miles. while the tariff charge
is S17 IL. Now treble the cost of the coal
and call IL 81 30 Then deduct that i'm
aguaTy expense 10 the Southern Pacific aud
tie net gIaln-bae rate, with the coal cost
deducted, is SD o.
That rate Sl5 62-is still 81 % higher by
the Southern Pacific than is the tariff charge
for erain-bags 500 miles on the Northern
Pacific.
So it Is seen that same ether argument be-
sides the awful cost OF coal must be adopted
by the Southern Pacific Company in ex-
planning its high freight rates.
The whole estimated cost of carrying one
ton of freight 2ne mile on the Northern Pa
cific, according 10 the Minnesota Railroad
Commissioners report. is .S4S of a cent.
Call IL twice that amount on the Southern
Pacific, or 500 cents, and the whole cost of
carrying one ton Of freight 800 miles to
Bakersfield Is only 50.SS cents. which was
the figure THE CALL put it at in its pre-
ylUus Illustration.
As a matter of fact the cost Of carriage TO
the company is not twice as much as on the
Northern Pacific. 1t would be very surpris-
ing to find, con nsiderlng the winter resistance
OF trains before remarked. if it costs three
fCurths as much TO run a railroad train in
the San Joaquin Valley as it does in Min
neSota
What this winter resistance amounts TO,
taking the whole year through, may readily
be seen. The NUIthern Pacific has the same
class of freight locomotives as the Southern
Pacific, and yet the average number of tons
Of freight hauled in train on the Mime
sofa line is reported at only 1862 while on
the California line il is 1876 Sc.