New-York tribune., 1904-10-10
THE OLD COM MERGE FIGHT
LOSSES OF THIS PORT.
Causes of Discrimination against
Nerc-YOrk by Railroads.

The threatened diversion OF the waterborne COM
merce of this city TO other ports is no new thing.
For twenty-five years and moro serious drains on
this branch OF New-York's commerce have been
going on In 1873 New-York exports were 6S-79 per
cent Of the entire exports of the country Now
New-York's proportion of the total export trade
has decreased to only u fraction OF what II was in
1873 and it is more than doubtful II the city ever
recovers her former overwhelming lead. The size
of the charges for its piers which yield the
city clear profit Of about s. 10000 yearly is not
alone TO blame for this For years the railroads
have Disseminated against this port. For instance,
the short %ew-York- Buffalo haul costs about the
same as the long Philadelphia Chicago haul. which
gives Philadelphia an immense commercial advan-
tage.
Because OF the great natural advantages OF this
port the railroads with terminals at the port OF
New-YoTk which includes the Jersey shore, estab-
lished in 1877 di1erental rates in favor OF ports
further south Philadelphia for instance. re-
received a reduction Of two cents and Norfolk and
Baltimore three cents per hundred pounds. In the
administration OF Governor Black the discrimina-
ton was so apparent that he appointed the New
York Commerce Commission, OF which Charles A.
Schieren chairman and the late Andrew II.
Green was one Of the members. The commits
sion's report voluminous and exhaustive. sub
mitted 70 the legislature January q. 1907. II
found that the diferentials established BY the
railroads one OF the leading causes OF the
diversion OF commerce from this port. When the
commission was appointed New oEk no longer en-
ioyed the overwhelming advantages over other
ports which had existed when the dferentials were
established
Three things. the commission found. served 10
bring about the diferentials. in the first place
These were distance. competition and cost OF terTn
nal facilities In the last also included the
cost OF Ilghterage between the railroad terminals
and the steamships. The cost OF Hghterage end
handling OF freight al this port is now one OF the
most serious disadvantages initiating against
steamship piers close together and there is
wharfage charge. At Boston. which has super
seeded New-Orleans as the second export city OF
this country. the railway and steamship terminals
No charge is made there 20 the steam
ship lines for wharfage. the railroads considering
the piers as part of their plants. paid for by their
rates merchandise.
New-York Waterborne commerce IS supposed 20
enjoy free lghterage but It developed before the
commission that the lighterage was free in name
only since the railroads made a rate on merchan-
disc 10 this city which more than covered all the
expense they incurred by free nghterage TO the
steamships from their own docks and terminals
In 1896 Philadelphia realizing the advantages
which would accrue by the improvement of her
terminal and transferable facilities voted SslSO
for the Improvement OF her waterfront to bring
the railroads and steamship lines closer together
New-Orleans has also spent great sums for the
purpose
James Mcknight. representing the New-York
and New-Jersey Bridge Company. in his testimony
before the commission on October .. 1898 said:
Other cities. in order to furnish The facilities nee
essary for the economical and expeditions transfer
OF import and export traffic from ship to car and
from car 10 ship have expended large snms Of
money in aiding the railroad and dock companiese
Liverpool alone with popuia ton OF 200 O00 people
with population of $4,000 $34 OOOOb: Antwerp
with a population of 0OO $25 900 06O: Rotterdam
a population of l20OO $500 900; and other cities in
Great Britain and the Continent have made SINH
lar expenditures
What has New-York done TO protect her import
has spent and is spending a large amount OF money
to improve her dock system and protect her local
traffic. and her Dock Department Is manifeSting
a lively and great interest in the question as 10
how 20 protect her import and export trafic and
TO regain for this city her former commercial
prestige.
Experience has demonstrated that private owner
better results in transferring with economy and
dispatch export and import traffic from car to ship
and ship to car than have been obtained from pub
lie ownership or the terminal facilities These
terminal facilities. however. are so closely con-
nected and interviewer with the welfare OF each
and every city where they exist that they should be
under municipal control far as police and other
regulations concerned.
Under the system Of transfer adopted al Boston
corrier's lobUitr TT,<Ja-
the system adopted in New-YOrk il is broken up
by the warehouse iighterage and elevator systems
and bankers of this city interested in the shipping
OF grain have caused the same be routed by way
ot IoSto aolcly. pI ACCOUNT u tIlc qulckneSS OF
dlspatch IN transferring and the continuous liability
of the common carrier. We must constantly bear
in mind that New -YorIs facilities and location
with the exception of terminals. have continuously
during the last twenty years been better than those
OF Boston. yet during all this time New York has
lost import and export traffic and Boston has con-
tinuously gained.
Ono great disadvantage IN the terminal system Of
of running the railroad trains directly on the piers
as Is he case In other cities