The age-herald., 1900-03-25

as the standard tariff rates" in Georgia are charged by only three lines-the Geor- gia Railroad, Alabama Great Southern and Western and Atlantic.
 In Class No. ?, the railroads are permit ted to charge the standard tariff plus 10 per cent, with few exceptions. There is one road in Class g. namely: the Atlanta and West Point
 In Class 3, the roads are permitted to charge the standard rates plus 20 per cent, with certain exceptions. In this class there are three roads.
 In Class 1, the roads are permitted to charge the standard rates plus 25 per cent, and under this class there are twelve roads, including the Central of Georgia, Southern Railway, and the Georgia and Alabama.
 In class 6, the roads are permitted to charge the standard rates plus from 20 to 50 per cent, and in this class are included thirty-three roads.
 1t is therefore not fair to compare the standard rates in Georgia with the rates charged by the Mobile and Ohio in Ala bama (the highesD and the Southern Rail- way in Tennessee.
 We submit the following statement showing a comparison of the rates of the Southern Railway in Alabama, Mobile and Ohio in Alabama, Cincinnati Southern in Tennessee Illinois Central in Kentucky Tennessee and Mississippi. for distances up to 200 miles. It is submitted that this comparison shows that the rates charged by lines in Alabama compare favorably with tn rates charged by important roads in other states, which rates are considered reasonable:
 (See Table No. D.
 Third-The statement submitted as Ex- hibit c of your petition shows a compari- son of the rates published by the various roads in Alabama and we understand they are objected to as showing a want of uni formity, which the Birmingham Commer- cial association thinks should not exist. It would seem that this conclus.on has been reached under a misapprehension. It has been shown that in Georgia where the rates are fixed by a railroad commission, there is an absence of uniformity in the rates charged by the various roads in tha stateh the commission authorizing some roads to charge rates 50 per cent higher than other roads.
 It is obvious, on reflection that it would not be possible to adopt uniform rates in the state of Alabama without doing Q seri- ous injustice to some interests. If the rates were made high enough to enable a road operating in a sparsely populated part of the state or dependent principally on traffic having origin or destination on it's line to earn a reasonable return on the investment. such rates would possible be too high when applied to rates on roads traversing popu- lous parts of the state where the freight and passenger traffic might be large in VOL ume, or where the lines have heavy through traffic.
 The same conditions which exist In Ala bana also govern in other states. The fol- lowing statement gives q comparison of rates in Kentucky on the Louisville and Nashville, Cincinnati Southern and Illinois Central roads: in Tennessee, on the Louis vile and Nashville. Illinois Central and Cincinnati Southern; in Mississippi, on the Louisville and Nashville, Mobile and Ohio. Kansas City, Memphis and Birmingham and Illinois Central roads in each case Tor distances from 10 to 200 miles:
 CSee Table No 3.
 Fourth-JTnder Exhibit D in your peti- tion. there are two distinct questions sub- mitted:
 (a). Complaint Is made that the rate on