The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-02-17
Problems of Railway Regulation,

In his address before the Minnesota
Municipal league to-day, President L.
A. Rosing discussed a number of In
teresting topics. Among them were
the relation of the state to the ten
dency to build unnecessary railway
lines closely paraleling those already |
in existence, and the effect of terminal
railway rates on social conditions
Mr.. Rosing argues that two railway
lines running side by side in region
where one is amply able to handle all
the business that Is offered constitute
an unnecessary burden on the people.
eff two roads are built" he says,
where only one is needed. the
rate must be fixed so as to pay reason
able dividends on the double invest
ment. If railroads are really public
highways, as suggested by Justice
Bradley's decision, then the same gen.
eral< principles apply as we'll to one as
to the other, and T do not believe that
anyone would suggest the advisability
of farming communities constructing
two parallel highways over which to
draw their grain to market, and yet
the one is as sensible as the other"
Mr.. Rosing reasons on the theory
3 that if there we're only one railway,
4 between Red Wing and Northfield, for
4 example, freight rates on that one
would be cheaper than on either Of
s the existing two, it being assumed that
competition has been eliminated as an
agency for rate reduction. If there
were free competition both roads
would probably lose money trying tc
get the lions share Of the business. Az
it is, both seek to make a profit or
their investment; and both are per
fectIy justified in doing SO, on the
principle laid down by the courts tina
railroads are entitled to impose rates
that will yield reasonable return OF
the cost of replacing them. If Their
were only one line between Red Win.
s and Northfeld, it would get all TIL
business, and could take a good prof
and yet greatly reduce rates. I
does not follow that it would volun
tarily reduce them, but the state woul
be in a. strong position to enforce
reduction.
Mr.. Rosing thinks that the stat
ought to take steps to protect it's pee
pie from such useless railway taxa
ton by refusing authority to bull
parallel railway lines in the same tel
ritory, unless it can be proved to tn
satisfaction of the railway commits
sion that there is traffic enough fl
two lines. That no general develol
ment of a railway system might /
1 interfered with by this rule, Mr.. RI
sing would have the state compel tt
M company owning the existing line
throw it open to the use Of a secor
company.
There is much in these suggestion
worth thinking about. The state ust
to encourage as many railway lin
a as possible, ON the theory that cor
petition would lower rates; but no
that competition Is the excepti'
rather than the rule among railway
1t must consider the building of VIII
81 may be called duplicate lines from a
other point of view.
Mr. Rosing is not the first pers
to deprecate the concentration of lar
populations in centers having favor
BILE railway rates. But it is by
means certain that straight distan
tariffs would prevent this consolid
ton, for the mere coming together
q number of railways at a given poi
gives it advantages over points locat