New-York tribune., 1905-11-10
AIR BRAKES ON FREIGHT CARS.

hearing was held few days ago by the
Interstate Commerce Commission relative to a
proposition to increase the proportion or frelght
cars on which the use Of air brakes Is required.
BY law which took effect September l, 1903
a minimum of so per cent. was made tne
standard for a time, and authority was given
to the commission gradually to raise it. Inc
propriety of adopting rs per cent as the legal
minimum on January l. 1906, has recently been
under consideration. and the railway companies
were invited to discuss the matter Many Of
them were represented at the hearing and
few reasons were offered for postponing Off
cial action to a later day than the one proposed.
1t was pointed out, for instance, that diff
Guilty is experienced in obtaining new cars fast
enough to meet the demands Of traffic. and II
the companies were to equip them with air
brakes there would be a greater delay than
ever Shippers would thereby be seriously in
convenienced-in some cases. at least-and the
embarrassment would be still greater If, owing
to inability to conform Immediately to the new
regulation 1t became necessary to remove any
rolling stock from service. Another trouble to
which reference was made grows out Of the
mixing of two kinds Of cars In the same train
It is now necessary to put the air brake cars
together at the front of the train; and that
practice interferes with the arrangement of
cars bound to different destinations In such an
order as to facilitate distribution. 1t is as
serted that the inconvenience resulting from
this cause is already extreme, but an increase
IN the legal requirement which was short of
100 per cent would still further aggrayate it.
A third objection Is that while the use Of more
air brake cars on main lines might be practica-
BILE, it would be premature on certain branches.
Thus the Norfolk and Western has begun to
substitute stronger bridges for the old ones on
some of It's branches, but has not yet completed
the change. Hence, at present it dare not run
the heavy standard freight car there Instead,
1t must employ old, light ones, which have not
been equipped with modern brakes. In this
and other instances the plea was made that it
would hardly pay TO equip with air brakes
stock which in the nature of things must soon
be discarded.
The most important argument advanced
against requiring the change at the opening of
1905 is that commerce might be hampered. 1t
might be said in reply that the consideration
would be equally potent one, two or three years
hence but that is hardly probable. There might
be q shortage Of cars, but the railroads would
doubtless be better off in respect to brakes.
Many of them equipping all new stock with
modern apparatus. Some already have an aver
age Of so or S5 per cent Of their cars provided
with it. 1t is necessary, though, to distinguish
between an average and a minimum When
once the latter has been defined authoritatively
It is not permissible to operate single freight
train with air brakes on less than the specified
proportion Of cars, even though every other
train on the road is composed Of such cars eI-
clusively. It would be undesirable, of course
to go to the other extreme and relax official
pressure entirely. Some corporations are so
conservative that they will act only under the
spur of authority. The change from rs to 100
per cent can be made more easily than from 90
to rs per cent, perhaps because when the final
step is taken there will be no bother with
mixed trains. A little further delay in insist
ing upon the adoption Of rs per cent as tho
minimum might, therefore. b judicious. Il thA