The record-union., 1896-12-14

the IsthmuS of Panama, thence by rail
forty-Seven miles across the said 18th
mus, and then by water to San Fran
cisco, are not subject to or controlled
by the Act to regulate commerce.; that
a very large part of the transcontinent-
al traffic in various commodities from
New York to San Francisco goes by
said routes; that your petitioners and
their connecting lines carrying similar
freight overland, cannot charge mate
rally more for the entire service than
is charged via such water routes; that
the alternative is left to such all-rail
carriers either 70 abandon entirely the
business of transconuinental carriage of
such traffic or to meet the rates SO fixed
by water competition, and your petit
tfonerS represent that the rates SO fixed
by water competition from the Atlantic
coast to the Pacific coast are on such
scale that if the same aggregate charge
and no more, were made from the Col
Orado common points to intermediate
points, such as Elko or Reno, or from
intermediate points such as Salt Lake
City or Ogden to California terminal
points, such rates would not yield a
reasonable or adequate compensation
to the carrier, based upon the actual
cost of service, including the cost of
maintenance of way and equipment
and a fair contribution to the fixed
charges and income ON investment of
the carriers.
That the rates fixed by water compe-
tition as aforesaid, while not compen-
satory to all-rail lines, do yield some
thing in excess of the actual cost of
movement, and in some degree contrib
ute to the cost of maintenance of way
and equipment. That the contribution
so made by said transcontinental traffic
including also traffic from Colorado
common points to California terminal
points, to the cost of maintenance, di-
minishes pro tanto the burden which
would otherwise rest upon intermedi-
ate traffic, and that, except for the con-
tribution so made by said through
traffic, the charges upon intermediate
traffic would be necessarily increased
And these petitioners further show
unto your honorable commission, that
the effect Of said water competition op-
crates also from the Atlantic seaboard
into the interior, where it is supple
mented by active and extreme railroad
competition from certain producing
centers, such, for example, as the City
of Chicago, which competition is made
the more effective by the influence of
the Canadian Pacific Railway operat-
ing outside of the Jurisdiction of the
United States, and not subject to the
Act to regulate commerce. That with
the influences hereinabove mentioned
there is combined also force, strongly
coercive upon the railroad carriers, in
the competition of producing markets
in their relation to the common con-
suming markets of the Pacific Coast
and that the various causes herein
above set forth determine and compel
rates from Colorado common points and
points east thereof to California termi-
nal points, at a scale much below a just
and fair compensation to the carriers.
And your petitioners further repre-
sent that as to many great staples of
commerce produced in foreign coun-
tries, as we'll aS in the United States
the markets of the San Francisco and
other California terminal points
can be supplied, and are sup
piled, by means of water trans
portation, and such commodities so
landed at Pacific Coast ports come
into competition there with like prod
uots shipped from divers points in the
United States over the lines of your
petitioners, and in order to meet the
competition so created, your petitioners
are further compelled to make rates
that will enable producers in the United
States to ship to such markets upon the
Pacific Coast.
Your petitioners respectfully submit
that they may justly, and it is their
duty as public carriers, to make rates
to said common markets upon the Pa
ctfic Coast that will enable American
producers to meet at such points the
competition hereinabove mentioned,
provided that the same can be done
without loss to the carriers, even
though the revenue derived from rates
established for that purpose are not re-
munerative to the carriers.
That the alternative is presented to
the said carriers to maintain their local
rates upon intermediate traffic, al
though hauled a shorter distance over
the same line and in the same direction,
while charging a less rate for through
aforesaid, or to raise the rates upon
through traffic to a level corresponding
with the charges upon local or inter-
mediate traffic, in which last event all
that traffic from Colorado common
points and east thereof to California
terminal points which comes in COM
petition with commodities put upon
said Pacific Coast markets by means of
water transportation would be lost to
the carriers and cease to make any
contribution whatever to income, fixed
charges, maintenance or conduct of
transportation, and the whole burden
thereof would rest upon local or inter
mediate traffic.
And your petitioners respectfully sub
NIT unto this honorable commission
that TO pursue the second alternative
viii serve no public advantage, but
would be seriously prejudicial to all
shippers at intermediate points between
the said Colorado common points and the
said Pacific Coast terminals, and that
the interest, not only of the carriers,
and of producers east of Colorado COM
mon points, and of consumers at Cali
fornia terminals, but also the interest
OF tnOSe situated at lHIefInedlaIe points
viii be best subserved by the carriers
pursuing the first alternative herein
above mentioned.
And your petitioners respectfully rep
resent that if the schedule of rates
which, under the various influences
hereinabove mentioned, your petitioners
have been compelled and are compelled
to put in force as to traffic from Colo
rado common points to California ter
,a1ir,ts. 90