The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1901-07-17
St. Louis VS.. Minneapolis.

The committee cited the following on
the rate to and from New England and
seaboard points:
The roads east of Buffalo get the same
amount as their proportion of freight charge,
whether the goods are consigned to the twin
cities. Chicago or st. Louis. The lake haul
should be practically the same to Lake Su-
perior points as to Chicago, as the distance
is the same. st. Louis is $50 miles from
Chicago, her nearest lake port The twin
cities are $50 miles from Lake Superior.
The twin cities are entitled to lower rate,
as the all-rail rates are governed by the
lake and rail situation. Instead of that, the
twin cities pay $1.15 hrst-class and st. Louis
81 cents.
The business done by the twin cities last
year was greater than that done by St Louis
in the last years on which it worked in the
old rate. The population of the twin cities
is larger than at the time that ST. Louis
was granted the new rate. On account of
size and volume of business the twin cities
are entitled to the same consideration that
was granted st. Louis.
st. Louis jobbers to-day are working twin
city territory thoroughly. This is because
st. Louis has lower all-rail rate to and
from the east than these cities. The twin
cities are entitled to protection. The argu-
ment may be made that the North Western
cannot control the trunk lines east of Chi
cago in making an attempt to secure this
rate. The St. Louis roads had the same
question to meet in 1876, and accomplished
their object. Minneapolis -four and grain
are kept on a comparative basis with St.
Louis on rates to the seaboard What argu-
ment can be applied in the case of -four that
does not apply with even greater force to
the merchandise shipper.
The Chicago Problem.
On the request for readjustment of
freight rates south and southwest of this
city, and more favorable train service to
place Minneapolis on fair basis in COM
peting with Chicago, the committee made
the following Illustrations:
The charge for hauling car load of mer-
chandise amounting to 10000 pounds, first
class freight. from Chicago 100 miles toward
st. James, Mimi, is $1572 similar car
load from Minneapolis 100 miles toward St
James, is s3115
The charge for hauling such car load
100 miles towards Winnebago City from Chi
cago is $1S; from Minneapolis, $26.25.
For the same car load from Chicago 100
miles towards Marshall, Mimi, the charge
is $15.75; from Minneapolis, $34.45
AS general proposition, On merchandise
moved from Minneapolis and st. Paul to all
points in southern Minnesota, northern Iowa
and South Dakota, the freight charge for
given service is twice as large as when the
goods are moved from Chicago.
A Question of Time.
Merchandise from Minneapolis to points
west of Tracy, Mimi, approximately $50
miles. requires the same length of time in
transit as merchandise from Chicago, which
is 500 miles away. To points on the FIRE.
mont, Elkhorn and Missouri valley several
hundred miles nearer Minneapolis than Chi
cago, the time in transit from MINNEAPOLIS
is nearly double that of goods from Chicago
This detrimental condition of service exists
on all lines. Chicago is favored in every
particular of freight and passenger service
For US to accept the usual arguments
that your road of itself can do nothing to-
wards adjusting these rates were you so
disposed; that other lines traversing this
territory must be consulted would be to
further consent that our rights as iobbine
center be ignored. The interstate commerce
commission has passed upon several cases
similar to our own and decided that s'agree-
ments between carriers, though designed IN
secure orderly and lawful operations of the
roads, cannot be permitted to fasten upon
neighboring localities a relation of rates
which Is unnatural or unjust
We are confident that were the Interstate
commerce law in the shape in which we be-
lieve congress intended to have It. emnower-
ing the commission to enforce its own rulings.
we could secure relief. We are Furthermore
persuaded that Its order would be for gen
eral reduction Of rates between the twin citiea
and the territory in question. We do not
wish to be understood as advocates Of the
curtailing of railroad revenue, but we can no
longer consent to the continuance of this an
noying and injurious condition of rates It
may be that rates from Chicago into the ter
ritory in question are too low, but If that is
true, 1t is now too late to make such claim
as they have been in effect too long and will
certainly never be advanced
The Iowa Case.
For the purpose Of comparison we desire 10
refer to another matter with which you are
Coptinued ON second PAGE.