The Virginia enterprise. [volume] (Virginia, St. Louis County, Minn.) 1893-19??, 1906-08-31
FARMERS OF NlILI,ION5
THE SOUTHERN ROADS BLOCK REDUCTION m
=S~# E#<*: GRAIN RATS. =<~*#s j %~s5#
Northern Roads, Great Northern, Northern Pacific
and 500, Offer 10 Per Cent Reductionin FIT SXz
Grain Rates-0ffer Is Rejected. ..s4,>s III

Es da1Sa fh f. Great Northern: Northern
Of 10 per cent in tie grain freight rates.
was rejected by the state railroad and
warehouse commission. because the reduce
snk wi n by tas
farmers Of Minnesota alone 81. oeo, 900 a
cent reduction in coal rates, Which vas vas
proposed by the commission. would have
meant a saving Of 100000 more to the
81 the Sea Sta tS.t making total Of
put into the POCKETS Of the people Of
Minnesota had the new schedules gone
into effect. The Minnesota reductions in
ed In reductions In neighboring states, and
the total saving to the farmers Of tie
Northwest would have been between ST.
100000 and 100000 a year
The Better. Plan.
The proposition was made by the three
northern roads as a compromise in the
ton in merchandise. rates. The roads
could not afford to make both reductions
The merchandise reductions would have
the grain reductions, by cutting the cost
Of getting grain to market. would have
benefited the farmers directly. The three
roads therefore proposed to reduce the
grain rates instead Of the merchandise
rates.
The members Of the state railroad and
warehouse commission seemed inclined to
lieving that the reduction in grain rates
would be g. much greater benefit to the
people Of the state. They asked, however,
that 10 Per cent reduction be made also
But the Southern Minnesota roads OBJ
jected; The proposed reduction in mer-
only to a trifling extent, while the pro-
posed grain rate reduction would have
meant material benefit to the people
face Of the opposition r 81 the sou9he ene
roads, the state railroad and warehouse
commission rejected the proposed grain
The proposition of the three northern
roads, the Great Northern, the Northern
Pacific and the 500, and their position in
tn the tha tfae is in their
The Proposition.
cusston SO far as they relate to - the
GS Be ee sa@ inf n Rss
same shall be dismissed; This because.
thst has fSsa % ar pd1
oped in the case proves conclusively that
ne a3a1 trafi1c Is being handled in
favorably with those in effect In other
states; that the present merchandise rates
do not more than pay the actual cost Of
the transportation furnished, and that a
reduction In said rates would be an in
Justice to the railway companies and i'm
practicable for them to accept.
%. It Is the opinion Of the railway
companies that the prosperity Of the por-
tton Of the state served by the said three
lines Is dependent upon the well being Of
the agricultural communities along those
he gd,sA rsd%GtiG on In the rates on
farmers and producers in Northern Min
nesota. This has been clearly brought
out In the testimony taken, it having
been shown beyond question that the only
persons to be benefited by the proposed
reduction would be the merchants.
Direct Benefit.
"A reduction in the rates on grain is
direct benefit to every farmer raising
a bushel OF grain for sale, as the price
paid the farmer for his grain in the coun-
try Is fixed by the price at the terminal
markets less the cost Of transporting the
grain to those markets Farmers desiring
to do so may ship their grain and sell It
themselves at terminal markets without
the interposition Of middlemen. II the
farmers are prosperous the communities
in which they live are prosperous. The
country merchants sell more goods, con-
sequently buy more, and the manufac-
turer and the jobber in the city enjoy an
enlarged trade. II, at any time. It IL
possible for the railway companies to re-
duce their. rates, the highest public policy
and the interests not only Of the rail:
citizens In this state demand that the