The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-04-13

The interstate commerce commission
application OF jobbers of the Middle
West for rulings that viii permit them
20 control the trade Of the Pacific coast.
The conflict Of principles Is well defined,
and testimony now is merely cumula-
tive. The jobblng interests OF the Coast,
Including our own, have been well
represented in the hearings elsewhere.
and the testimony which they presented
was clear. weil-considered and convinc-
ing. We cannot believe that II will be
less than conclusive. For what the Pa
cinc coast asks is no more and no less
than justice. II requires no advantage
Of any man. II has right to protec-
ton against aggression; against the de-
mand that the legitimate regulations
applied to commerce by Its instruments,
regulations based wholly upon natural
conditions that none may set aside. be
not overturned 10 please an arrogant
combination OF distant business inter-
ests. bent upon invading this field for
their personal profit
Let It be understood that the con-
sumner In not party to this plea The
Jobbers from east OF the mountains do
rot propose to give to him any advan-
tage. and they cannot IT In their profit,
not his. that Is to be weighed In the
balance. They wish to control the trade
OF this Coast: a trade that has been
built up by our own capital our own
enterprise. our own labors. To the
community they offer nothing In return.
They demand a concession against
which they fought for their lives In
years past. as vigorously as we are
York to control the field OF Chicago, OF
Chicago to control the field OF St Paul
and Minneapolis and Omaha and Dem
Yer. was resisted TO the uttermost. They
who are now the plaintiffs were de-
PENDANTS then And every argument
which we advance against them they
Rave used In time past. Now they are
the aggressors. They have learned
their lesson well. II would be strange
II we had not oonned ours with equal ef-
feet
The points of attack are two. These
Middle West iohbers demand the abo,
lstion Of the differentlals on through
fretEhts 10 the Coast and the abolition
or reduction to q negligible quantity II
the difference between tho carload rate
and that on less than carload lots Their
purpose Is to bring In their goods from
the East in competition with the Coast
trade 10 drive 1, out Il possible, and
then 60 work this neld, with the same
throug hness OF combination which
they exhibit Ia this hght. untn Il Is ex.
haustcd With the merchants % the
Coast territory reduced e. dependence
upon the trade eentcrs ~ the Mississippi
ana Missouri regions. they see fine pick
luSF ahead. They are not willing 10
establish branch houses in this terri
tory. on a fair basis They are modest
enough 60 ask I, all for themselves
on neither Of the points which they
raise are they able ta make reason
ahle contention Thp freight rates oa
through shipments 20 the Coast ami
their ge'atlon 10 those charged for
shorter distances arc not nNed D., aroi-
trary arrangement They are conse-
quence of water onmpTutra. The et.
feet % this was perfectly kp'on u the
trainers 0f the Interstate commerce law.
II was covered by providing that rates
should bear certain relation 20 dis
lance only when circumstance and
conditions are equal Thu existence ~
an eneviive water competition Is one
az the circumstances ana conditions
that destroys equality. II gNvs a sp-
Eerior advantage 60 cities that are
within reach Of IT, Il makes lower
freight rate. 1; intcrfevcs with ana stts
aside the otherwise uniform application
OF the long haul rule, Its validity has
been recognized from the hrst by all
competent authorities and continued By
the courts.
1t Is this freedom Of the ocean route,
~