The record-union., 1893-02-07
Arguments Against the Traffic
Associations Bill
some INDISPUTABLE FACTS.
More Of Leeds Inconsistencies Are
Exposed to View.
j. N. FULTON'S CAUSIIC LETTER.
lie Waited Patiently for Whaek at Leeds,
but Was Denied That Pleasure
The Arguments.
j. N. FULTON'S CAUSIIC LETTER.

The Senate Committee on Constitutional
Amendments met again last evening in
the Senate Chamber and resumed it hear
ing of the Traffic Associations proposed
amendment fixing rates, etc. Senator
Earl presided.
Joseph Woods, attorney for the Nevada,
California and Oregon Railroad, ad-
dressed the committee as soon as it was
called to order. He said he appeared for
j. NJ. Fulton, Master of Transportation OF
the Nevada, California and Oregon, who
could not be present. He had letter
from Mr.. Fulton, addressed to the COM
mittee, and read it. 1t was as follows:
RENO New, Feb. +, 1898.
Senator Fart, Chairman Senate CJBlntlt-
tee on Constitutional 4 amendments, Sacrd-
7aento-DEAR SIR: l notice by the press
that Mr.. Leeds, of the Traffic Associa-
lion, intends being i'll Sacramento at the
next meeting of your committee. lie
states his willingness to answer any ques-
lions put to him by anyone representing
the small railroads of California, and par
ticularly myself.
Mr.. Chairman, I waited in Sacramento
from Tuesday, the 24th day of January
until late on Wednesday night, February
LIST, for Mr.. Leeds, that he might explain
to me certain assertions he has made.
I only left then on account of having
waited eight days, and no Leeds. l gave
up all hopes, and now do not believe he
will come before your committee, for |
assure you l would be present Monday
evening to meet Mr.. Leeds and attempt
his entertainment for time.
ask your honorable committee to no.
tice with what perversity Mr.. Leeds
asserts that the small roads are not al
fected by his bill. He should explain
why they are not, and whether they
would be when their earning power in
creases to the sinful point of $4,000 per
mile per year gross earnings.
Our table of certain commodities pur-
chased in st. Louis, Chicago, Philadel-
phia, ETC., with freight added, has been
criticised by Mr.. Leeds. The table was
given to your committee, believing that it
might assist you in coming to just con-
clusion upon this vexed question which |
believe you and your committee desire to
do.
In the criticism alluded to, Mr.. Leeds
says, Il am bowling against our own in
terests. that the Southern Pacific Com
pany is robbing u.s." Perhaps so, and
even if il We're so, my statement of the
cost of those commodities is still fact,
and, therefore, does 1t not show that II
cost us more to operate our road than it
does Eastern lines? Mr.. Leeds says
mo" 1 say 'Yes." Again, does the
Southern Pacific Company's line run to
Philadelphia. st. Louis or Chicago? Will
Mr.. Leeds deny the fact that the rates
paid by us on the shipments enumerated,
and which he criticises are not now lower
than when he was Chairman of the
Iranscontinental Association; did we
then hear his voice commanding a reduc-
tion of rates?
Mr.. Leeds has made statements before
your committee that are not founded on
facts. Perhaps-through ignorance, per-
haps-he has deceived the Traffic Asso-
citation, and is trying to stir up a fuss
where there is little cause for it. Nj.
Leeds has said that he does not see the
Justice or fairness Of the criticism he is
receiving by the small roads of this
State. Let us see about it. MIR. Leeds,
an employe of certain San Francisco
merchants, personally having no inter-
est except the salary he receives, comes
before your committee and advocates
that you recommend fer passage to the
Senate, an amendment to the Constitu-
tion of the State OF California, whereby
the maximum charge OF any railroad III
California shall not, for passengers, ex-
ceed two cents per mile, and that the pro-
posed distance tariff affect every road,
large or small, up hill or level, exactly
alike. You, Mr.. Chairman, by your in
cisive questions, of which Mr.. Leeds did
not answer one-half, showed the bill to
be so devoid of common sense that vour
committee adjourned, that it might be
changed and printed. 1t came again be-
fore you with q clause reading that roads
earning over $1,000 gross per mile per
year must not charge to exceed certain
rates for passengers or freight. Roads
earning less than 1000 per mile were 10
he subject TO laws yet to be made by the
Legislature. Why did Mr. Leeds at
tempt to have a law passed. giving
the small roads of this State but
two cents mile? Ii it were right and
honest, why did he change it? Was il
done through ignorance, or was it in
tended to wrong? If the former. he
is not worthy of consideration; if the lat
ter, he committed a crime. The fact.
however, remains, and should be consid-
cred by your committee, that he did sue
ceed in getting the honorable Senator
from Napa to introduce the PROPOSED
amendment, which would ruin every
small, or large road, for that matter, in
California, if it became the law of this
State: and in speaking upon the question
he said. if the small roads did lose money
il was a bad investment they had made
and no one was at fault except the in
yestors. Now, he objects to our criticism
and saws we are unjust. Mr.. Chairman.
! think we are not, but that Mr.. Leeds,
in introducing or proposing, or causing
TO be proposed or introduced, such a
measure has shown either an evil mind
or the most dense ignorance.
MIR. Chairman and gentlemen of the
committee, Mr.. Leeds scatters-he scat
ters badly-he is truly no good as rail
road expert l do not believe he is good
Tor the Traffic Association of San Fran
cisco and think all will bear me out in
the assertion that he is rank failure as 4
Kramer OF amendments to the Constitu-
ton.
Now, with what you have not heard
from Mr.. Leeds and with what you have
heard from Mr.. Burgin, Mr.. Wade, Mr..
hidder, Mr. Bender and other gentle
men who have appeared before you, i
think you will, when considering this
very important subject, place Mr.. Leeds
utterances in the niche where they
properly belong. His assertion that the
Southern Pacific officials are handling
the Representatives OF the smaller roads
to its lthe Southern Pacific Compauv'sl
advantage or attempting to do so Is not
worthy of notice. 1t is not a fact. II
compares fayorably. however. with other
assertions made by Mr.. Leeds and I ask