The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-09-03


Great Northern for refusing to arbI-
| trate.
| In view OF the aid granted to the
| american roads by suspension Of the
long and short-haul clause and the re-
| quest for its continuance the commis-
| sion finds il necessary TO determine
| whether this claim for a differential IL
/ just and says that all along this has
/ been the real source Of contention be-
/ tween the parties.
The commission holds that the claim
/ made in behalf OF the American roads
| that no Canadian road is entitled to a
| difereatial under any American line on
any American business Is probably un-
/ tenable, even from the standpoint OF
| the American roads. as some Canadian
roads, notably the Grand Trunk work
! in close connection with American lines
| and the public interest in the reduced
rates caused by competition is not to be
ignored.
The application Of a rule that a Ca
madam road shall in no case charge less
TIM an American road might go further
towards destroying the benefits of Ca
madam competition. Whether or not
Canadian roads should be allowed to-
participate at all in the carrying trade
Of the United States is much broader
and an altogether different question.
Under acts of congress they are aow
admitted to such participation, and
whether this is wise or the reverse 10
for the consideration OF congress, or the
treaty-making power and il is pointed
out that this is one of the subjects be-
fore the Anglo-American commission
now in session at QueDec.
Passing to the question OF fact
whether at the present time the Cana
dian Pacific ought 10 have a differen-
tial on the business involved. the COM
mission holds that the distance between
New York and San Francisco by the
Canadian Pacific IL about 1000 miles as
against 5000 by the direct American
routes; that the Canadian Pacific does
not seem 10 have any business with
the passenger traffic between these
points. and that a differential should be
denied on that ground.
But the Canadian Pacific does not
seriously contend for a concession on
San Francisco business and its real
claim is that the differential should be
applied to Portland and points on the
North Pacific coast and on the Atlantic
coast to Eastern Canada. New England
and the state Of New York. Between
these sections the Canadian Pacific is a
natural and feasible route. and should
be treated as a competitor. The time
and distance by various routes are COM
pared and the claim of the Canadian
Pacific that 1t ought to have a differen-
tial on account of longer time con-
sumed is found TO have little force from
the fact that II makes much better time
via st. Paul than over its main line.
and the presumption is that 1t could
make as fast time over the latter route.
railroad must not create a disability
for the sake of obtaining a differential
Every other consideration except that
of time is against the granting of the
diferential Its imperfect physical
conditions and lack of connections
have all been changed. OF all these
competing lines the tracks OF the Ca
madam Pacific alone extend from ocean
to ocean. Its roadbed and equipment
are equal to any. 1t may be doubted
II the name OF any of its rivals. per-
haps, OF the American railroads, is more
generally known throughout the civil
lied world than is that of the Canad-
ian Pacific. When this differential was
first granted business to Pacific coast
points went largely to San Francisco.
Practically none went north TO VAN
couver. 1t is largely in consideration
of that fact that the differential was
then allowed.
To-day this is not so. The great
volume OF traffic by these transconti-
mental lines Is 10 Puget Sound or
through Puget Sound to points beyond
Ten years ago the Canadian Pacific
was out of the direct line of traffic be-
tween the East and the Pacific coast.
To-day IL is the direct line for a large
portion of that traffic. In location,
distance, construction. equipment,
through car service. reputation. facil-
tiles for obtaining business and scenic
attraction-the Canadian Pacific would
not for a moment admit its inferiority
to either of the others. Again. the
use of differentials is almost exclu-
sively confined TO trunk line territory
and rates made in combination there
with.
The Great Northern is at a disadvan-
tage compared with the Northern Pa
cific in the matter OF obtaining an equal
OF passenger traffic, and yet
the Great Northern asks for no differ
entails No line, American or Canadian,
ought to insist upon a differentfal un-
less it Is at a manifest disadvantage.
This is especially true of the Canadian
Pacific. a Canadian institution. built
largely by the government and for gov
purposes. IL IL comes into the
United States to compete for traffic be-
tween United States points IL should
be content to operate upon the same
terms as its American competitors un-
ess those terms are clearly unjust or
1t should not insist upon
/ different order OF things here unless
I can make it's title TO the demand clear
beyond all question. The Canadian Pa
life appears. however. TO be entitled to
make as low a rate on this transconti-
rental business as any American line.
The commission further points out
hat II has also suspended the long and
hort haul clause for American lines on
business TO and from the Kootenai min
ng district in British Columbia and tho
,rovince OF Manitoba.
The decision, which was written by
Prouty, then concludes
5 quoted previously.
Bicycle Races.