The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-09-30

HlmUWWT UHT0 the IN
Judgments The amount claimed in suits in
the year is not accessible.
The total number of miles operated by
lines outside of Texas. embraced in this
table. aggregate 1858 miles. The total
number OF miles operated nv lines in the
state OF Texas. embraced in this table az
greGate 6l25 miles The number OF suits
fled against these non-Texls lines for the
year 1899 aggregate 403 or In round numbers
one SUIT Ter every ~ miles operated The
total number OF suits Instituted for the year
1879 against the Texas lines, embraced in this
table. AGGREGATES 429. or in round numbers
one suit for every fourteen miles operatef.
The total amount claimed in all Of the suits
inetituted against the non-IeNas lines (oth1r
than the Missouri Pacitc) during the year
1892 aggregates S25i5,3l3, IT in round num-
hers $50 ner mile. The total amount claimed
in all OF tho suits Instituted against the
Texas lines during the year 1879 asglesateS
81 40l.729 or in round numbers N.2O per
mile. Tho total amount paid during tho
year 1899 by all these nor Texas lines az
gregates SIS. AIS. 50, or S.4S per mile, the
total amount paid during he year 1893 by
all the Texas lines aggregates $500 1913, or
see per nile.
policy touching the settlement of claims ana
the conduct of litigation obtains on the nn n
OF the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe ran,
road as obtains the Gulf Colorado ana
Santa Fe railroad; that the same policy op-
tains on the lines OF the st. Louis soutn-
western Railway company anu tne 81 sou''
Southwestern Railway company Of Texas; that
the same policy obtains on the lines OF the
Houston and Shreveport Railroad company
and the Houston East and West Texas nan
way company; and likewise on the lines OF
the Missouri. Kansas and Texas Railway
company and the lines Of the missouri,
Kansas and Texas Railway company OF Iexas'
1t is evident, therefore. that the great dinef-
ence between the volume OF litigation OF this
class on the lines in and out or Texas is
not due to the difference in the policies
adopted by their respective Arrangements, as
II will be noted that the Atchison, Topeka
and santa Fe during the year 1899, paid in
judgments rendered in this class of lltga-
ton only 81 10 per mile, as against $56sS paln
by the Gulf Colorado and Santa re- that
the Missouri Kansas and Texas Railway
company paid only sl979 per mile, as against
s217 &c pnid by the Missouri, Kansas ana
Texas Railway company OF Texas that tne
ST. Louis Southwestern Railway company paiu
only So 80 per mile, as against $I4S palu by tne
St. Louis Southwestern Railway company 81
Texas and that the Houston and shreveport
Railroad company paid nothing at an, as
against s50.62 per mile paid by the liouston
East and West Texas Railway company MT
can the EXPLANATION for this remarkable dli
ference in the experience between the lines IN
and out OF Texas be accounted for by reason
Of any difference in tho pnyscai cohai.,9 ~
existing. or the manner of handling traihc
on these lines in Texas. as compared Win
those mentioned operated in other states
Considered as a whole, neither the pny-
traffic on the lines mentioned In ILLINOIS,
Iowa Missouri Nebraska Kansas, Colorado,
California. Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizohha
indian Territory, Indiana, Michigan. oanaua,
wyoming Utah Arkansas and Doulslalia
t:ffer substantially from those obtaining ou
the lines mentioned, operated Wholly witnlr
Texas Neither can this difference De ac'
counted for upon the theory ina. NOR ave nne.
rated In the other States named, Tor tn'
statistical report OF the interstate commerce
commission for the year 1898 tthe report iol
the year 1899 has Just been pubnsneu' pu
has not vet reached mel shows that In sronl
4 (which embraces Texas Louisiana anC
Southeastern New MeXlco) there were fewe'
employees killed in railway accloents' ~ pi9
uortion 10 the number employed, than u
anv other OF the ten groups into which TN
United states Is divided by that commission
and tnken as a whole there IS not marke'
difference between the number OF men en- u
ployed for one injured or the number o
rassci gers carried one mile. for one lnlure
on the roads embraced IN group y, as con-
pared with those which lie IN the ptne
prouns which embrace the States In whlcl
the lines above compared with the Texa
lines are operated.
we must, therefore. look elsewhere 10
the EXPLANATION of this most remarkable an
startling difference between the experience
of the Texas lines in personal injury lusa
tion. ana those of other States. In taxing
This ,nouiry | shall first ask;
Arc the railroad companies the"
selves responsible for the extraor
dinary warfare waged against theI
through the courfs'
In the early days OF railroad development
IN Texas traffic was very light, revenues wei
consequently small. material and operatlil
, srne,,sea were costly, and rates OF inteTo'
ysere E,eh bonds bearing Z and per Ger
md even higher rates) and there was
sans,snt struggle against insolvency ana r.
.eivershins. Under such conditions, the temp
: alton was strong to decline 10 pay cis AZ,
: mat should be paid; and In those cary oa,
~ railroading IN this state, rsliroae lhauase,
, Were I fear too prone to take tne cnanc'
. y, ne wing M the end OF a protracted Mugs
, lion IN required 80 10 do, much larger sun
! than we're demanded in COMPROMISED the
purpo.e being 10 at least postpone 'ne CIV
day. ..h 80 railroads w,
! srrcseded nv the period OF reeeiyership
which was the process through when q
nnvsi,al condition OF most OF the roaas W
vastly improved and the cost OF mBlnts ii.l
and eperation for the future thereby rean i.e
and through which also the annual lhsers
. chnrrs was enormously reduced thronsn .
auction In the rate Of interest 90 poneA ITO
|, y and 4 ner cent and even higher. 10 AZ
y ami q 'per cent But during most OF y
: nerIod of reseiverships claimants were con
. peiisd Ia ntigate their claims against ~,
receiyers before masters appointed py