The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1899-10-31
FREIGHT DISCRIMINATION.
Inc Case argued Before the
Interstate Commission. -

Washington, October 27.-The COM
against the Southern and other rail-
o companies, was argued before the
inter state commerce commission To-
day, Mr.. Holmes Conrad appearing for
h city and Mr. Edward Baxter for the
railroad companies.
Mr.. Conrad said, in his presentation
of the charges, hat they were those
Of discrimination in favor of Lynch
burg and Richmond against Danville
and included not only freighfs to Dan
vile and the other points, but outgoing
rates as well, the latter item including
especially the rates on tobacco to Louis
vile The specific allegation was tina
higher rates were charged from other
points TO Danville than were charged
from those same points to Lynchburg
and Richmond, Notwithstanding the
haul TO Danville is the shorter This
he characterized as an undue and I'M
W~arrantable preference. He presented
a table TO show that while the distance
to L~ynchburg was sixty-six miles
greater from points in the New Eng
land and Middle states han to Dan
vile there was a preference in favor OF
~Lynchburg Of II cents per 100 on first
class freightS and a corresponding pref
erence on all other classes of freight. \
difference Of II cents was shown on
freight from Baltimore, of "a cents on
western flour, and of 16 cents on leaf
tobacco to Louisville.
Replying, Mr.. Baxter admitted that
the Lynchburg and Richmond rates
were lower than those TO Danville, but
he denied that they were made under
substantially similar conditions. His
contention was ITO the effect that the
rates to Lynchburg and Richmond had
been made to meet the figures of lines
which were in existence when the
Southern road entered the field and he
quoted numerous old schedules, some
Of them going back as far as 1876, TO
shOW that the rates to Lynchburg lac
from that time been lower than those
to Danville. The Southern road had
neither reduced nor increased rates and
could not be held responsible for the
tariffs imposed If the question involv-
ed Danville only there might be an easy
adjustment, but 1T involved a principle
and, therefore, the change could not
be conceded. This principle was the
right to make lower rates where there
was competition than where there was
not. He also showed that on the Wash
ingtOn line of the road the distance to
~Lynchburg was less than that TO Dam
vile and commended that this being the
case the rate 10 LynchDurS from Nor
folk over the Norfolk inc must be the
same as hat oven the Washington line,
Notwithstanding on the Norfolk line the
distance to Danville was less.
In his r~ejoinder, Mr.. Conrad said thar
in opposition to the showing Of old
schedules the testimony of many wit
nesses made it plain that the Danville
rates had been increased since 1886,
when the Southern Company had ac-
quired the lines running into Danville,
and he commended that the discrimina-
'tiOH had been so great as to sap the
life blood of that city. Merchants from
Richmond and Lynchburg had been
able to sell goods under the shadow of
the houses in Danville, the result being
that Danville merchants were driven
out of business.