The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-02-20


TEN, With all or nearly all of the other
railroads In Texas, were then members OF
what was known ns the Texas Traffic
association, presided over by one j. Waldo.
rites ana rules for transportation of cot
ton, dated, Houston Texas. September Is.
1883: effective October l. 1883, and signed
by j. Waldo.
From all the points named in those tar
ms, and from all common point territory,
the rates were per bale $40 TO Houston.
aud $3.50 to Gulvcston, BY subsequent
circular, effective December l. 1883. tho
rate was changed to cents per hundred
weight, 81 cents to Houston and 40 cents
70 Galveston. | have transcripts from the
local stations, made by the experts of
this commission, which show beyond doubt
that cotton was actually billed out from
common point territory stations at this
rate, viz; W cents to Houston and 20
cents to Galveston. Such were the tarllfs
OF the International and Great Northern
railroad and Gulf. Colorado ard Santa Fe
railway, the only lines reaching Galveston
NJ that time. have before me copies
Of actual accounts If sale. furnished by
W. L. Moody Il Co. cotton factors at
Galveston, showing the actual freight paid
in 1855 was $3.50 per bale to galveston.
which amount was collected from their
patrons In tile interior. have the state
ments of number of cotton shippers to
IKE effect, | have an original executed
III OF la,iing issued on December H.
lsss. by the Missouri Kausns and Texas
halfway company. To Martin. Wise x
which the rate Is stated SO cents per 100
pounds. Then and now New Orleans took
u rate 10 cents higher than Galveston. In
deed, the testomony Is abundant and over
wbelming that in 1883. and ever since
until reduced by this commission. the rate
on cotton from common point territory
was uniformity e. cents per 100 pounds
to Houston and 40 cents to Galveston
and know of no one other than n popu-
list bold enough and reckless enough to
assert otherwise
Rpfnrriuo my tn fbn trJ
which You call attention. npprehend that
IL has not been forgotten that the enemies
of the commission az the beginning cared
nothing especially about the particular
tariffs promulgated, hut directed their war
fare against the very vltnls of the com
mission law. denouneIne 1t as being I'M
constitutional aud wholly imperative.
Federal Judge was found who upheld this
contention. and the result was that the
commission law was IN peril for about
two years. dur0g which time this com
mission was forbidden to regulate freight
rates or TO enforce the provisions of the
commission law OF course, the railroads
assailed the tariffs made by the commits
to the main question, In order to get Il
decision as TO the law OF the case the
answers were Withdrawn, as appears from
their report 70 the governor MS follows:
we deem u unnecessary here to refer
t. this litigation further than to say that
constitnlionality Of the commission law,
and that the Judgment of the supreme
court was In favor of the State. ana sus-
tained the validity of the act In its en-
tircty.
THE Issue as TO the reasonableness Of
the rates fixed by the commission was
blcncss being admitted in the picadings,
for the purpose of securing q speedy hear
lug on the main issue involving the life of
the commission act"
Subsequent events have demonstrated the
wisdom Of this course Otherwise Il Is
most likely that this case would now he
pending In the Federal courts and the
commission would have continued power
less to remedy any OF the many evils so
sadly In need OF correction"
Whoever asserts that freight rates upon
the. whole and In this way we must deal
with the question: are higher now than
Mt any time before the cstal lishment OF
the. commission makes IN assertion which
10 maintain. For the last twenty years.
both In Europe ana America. and practi-
Saily In every state or Territory In the
United States. taking the question upon
steady decrease In freight ratios. Freight
rntcS would be lower than they were in
1870 II there had been no commission and
! have no doubt they would have heen
lower In spite Of commission for there
are competitive conditions thar would In
many instances have forced reductions.
I believe II Is universally accented that
the safest. test as 20 the increase or de-
crease IN freight rates Is the rate per ton
per mile earned for given period OF
time.
The average rate pcr ton per mile re
celved on freight transported by railroads
Of the United States was:
In 1861. 10a5 cents
In 1872. iS46 cents
In 1877. 1. $50 cents.
In 1882. ii02 cents.
In 1887. .net cents.
In 1892 SOS cents.
In 1875, sos cents
reduction from 1867 OF about 5S per
cent
In Texns the average rate per ton per
mile received on freight transported ny
Texas railroads was:
Year ending June 30. 1921. 1.f0s cents.
Year ending June 30. 1894. .232 cents.
Year ending 1une tO ISM I f3S cents