The record-union., 1895-03-18
Weather Forecast.
AN ATTEMPT TO CIRCUMSCRIBE
THE RIGHTS OF AMERICANS.

been promoted by single individual
whose views concerning its objects are
we'll known. Its entire programme in
Guiding the speakers, is already arranged. |
It's resolutions are already drafted and |
practically passed. These resolutions
have been published. One of them is as
follows:
Inasmuch as charges on transportation af- |
feet and determine the price of goods, this !
convention urges upon the transportation |
companies to so adjust their tariffs as to J
afford a reasonable protection to nome lnuus-
tries ana TO enable Pacific Coast manufactur-
ing centers to reach points in the interior OF |
the State at more favorable rates than now |
exist, and it is the opinion of this convention !
that extremely low freight rates between the
great manufacturing points in the East and |
California and high freight to and from
points in the interior of the state are dlsas-
trouS to the interests of the manufacturers,
producers and trans portation companies ana
to the best interests OF California.
The railroad companies have been crit
icised for adjusting traffic to a rate pro-
portioned to the value Of the goods car
ried. They have been charged with max
ing the rate all the traffic will bear. This
characterization is unjust. The doctrine
more costly commodities is a process of
placing upon the traffic no more than 1t
it can bear-not all it can bear. But here
is a demand made for placing upon goods
brought from the East an arbitrary rate.
It is demand that the railroad shall ex-
ercise governmental function, and by
the rates of transportation protect all the
industries of the Pacific Coast. 1t is the
doctrine of high protection carried into
the adjustment of transportation rates.
If California may reasonably ask the
overland railroads serving it to charge a
higher rate on imported goods, then the
railroads possess the right to make the
importation of such goods prohibitory.
If California may protect itself against
Eastern manufactures, then one part of
California may protect itself against an
other part. Los Angeles might declare
that goods manufactured in San Fran
cisco should be charged an arbitrarily
high rate-not a rate designed to secure
the movement or against injustice, but
rate designed to prevent the movement
of the freight. so that the local manu-
facturer at Los Angeles would have the
opportunity of supplying local demand.
If the railroads of this country have
the right to put in force policy of high
protection, then they are the Govern
ment; and the question to be raised is,
shall the railroads be operated by the
Government, or the converse of that pro-
position, the Government operated by
the railroads?
This convention proposes soberly to
ask the railroads to charge rates of trans
portation not proportioned to what the
traffic will bear, not designed to afford
the interstate commerce of America the
free use of lines from one part of the
country to another; not intended to pre-
vent the imposition Of rate beyond
what the traffic can afford; but rate de-
signed to circumscribe the right of al
Eastern manufacturer to enter California
with his goods, and for the purpose O.
protecting the manufacturer of California
against Eastern competition.
This has been limited at in the public
press over and over again; but the in
stance under consideration is the frs
where an assemblage of men propose de
iberately to ask the railroads of th'
country to take into their hands th'
Of Nv ha n
the highest governmental function.
more insane, brainless, short-sighted
imbecile proposition never emanateC
from an assemblage of citizens in an!
part of any country. Aside from it
utter foolishness, it is wholly impracti
cable. The ocean is a factor in the trans
portation of this coast, and the ocean con
trolls the overland rate.
When this convention approaches tn
overland railroads serving the State c
California, to ask that the productions Q
the Eastern States shall be denied
reasonable or competitive rate of trans
portation, what will be the retaliator
effect? California is producing gree
and dried fruit for sale at the East. 1t
producing wool and hides, leather an
other commodities. If the overland raj
roads are to protect California agains
the Eastern manufacturers, would ther
be anything unreasonable in askin
them TO protect the Eastern States againt
California production?
Why should the orchardlst of the Ea
be forced 10 meet the competition
California fruit when the Californ
manufacturer is protected by railroa
rates? Do the people of California wal
to set Florida the example of asking tt
overland railroads to protect the orans
growers of that country against Il
every part of the United States set L
for itself in the business of local MANI
them to make the rate of transportatic
toward their locality so high as TO affoI
measure of protection, and at the san
time hope that the policy will not b
come universal, and therefore as injul
Gus in its movement one way as t
other?
If high rate of transportation is plac
upon the west bound wares of the Eas
ern manufacturer. then the sea w