The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1906-03-17
c. & D. CANAL TOLLS
Senator France Frankly States
His Views on the Question.
Annapolis. VI l.. Mar. u, '0G.


you and the people of the county my
views on the merits of the Ill now be
fore the Maryland Legislature, which
has for its purpose the granting to the
Chesapeake X Delaware Canal Company
the right to demand tolls ON passengers
carried through the Canal and further
the granting of said Canal Company the
power and authority to engage in Il gen
"rLl transportation business.
| shall attempt to be us brief as pos
,ihle consistent with clearneSS. and |
h"'t to b" able to make my position
plain.
lii tn" first place, permit me to say
that in this matter desire to see only
justice done, and so far as | am able
| shall make an effort TO see that all
parties interested receive justice only and
nothing more, and | would add that no
power has been exerted nor can be eX-
erted to change, this my position.
Now, i'll the first place, it is my opn-
ion that to allow the Chesapeake Il
Delaware Canal Company the right to
charge Il reasonable toll on each passen-
ger carried through the canal would be
only just. When we consider that said
Canal Company has II right to charge
toll on freight it would seem to me incon-
sistent to prevent it from charging toll
also on what we might call human
freight or passengers and the reason
said company was not granted such
power originally is, | am informed, be-
cause ut the time its charter was grant
ed, none of the parties interested thought
that passengers would ever be carried
through the caWal in considerable num-
berS.
Now the only question then, which
arises in connection with the above state
ment, as to the justice of allowing the
Canal Company to charge a reasonable
toll, in as to what sum would be con-
Sidcrcd, by an impartial judge, to be
reasonable.
In order to determine this we would
need to have certain data on which to
base an estimate. We must know on the
one hand how much the transportation
line now operating in the canal could add
TO given passenger fare with q rea-
sonablc charge o. still being able to sue
ceSsfuIIy compete with the railroads and
on the other hand. we must know
how much the said transportation line
could afford to have deducted from the
net profit of each passenger since it
must be evident that the transportation
company must meet and pay such toll
by either increasing the passenger fare
or decreasing the net profit on each pas
scngcr or possibly by Il combination of
these two methods.
Not having at hand any data which
would enable me to decide what sum
would, in the premises, be a reasonable
toll. ! could only make an oifhand eSti-
mate that it would be about - per cent.
of the sum asked for by the Canal Com
pany. and would therefore place it at
about fifteen cents. which sum might or
might not be Just. which however | be-
licvc could be readily determined.
Now. while | believe that the cause of
the thcSaPrHk" and Delaware Canal
Company is Just. rs far as its request
for the rig.h to charge reasonable tons
on passengers l.. concerned. | feel that
the bill Is it now stands would. if passed,
Sub>tiiut" Il greater injustice for Il les
ser one
In the first place. the Canal Company
now has the right to demand toll on
freight. The said Corporation now de-
>lrcS the additional power of charging
tolls on passengers and in addition to
this ii demands to have conferred upon
It the power to engage in the business
of transportation.
Now, | consider that to grant all Of
the Canal Company'S present claims
would b" unjust because having be-
come possessed. !. such claims should be
granted, of the power to levy heavy
tolls ON merchandise and passengers
carried by the vessels of other lines. the
said Canal Company would also then
have the power 10 put into operation n
line of vessels of its own and since its
own vessels would be. to all practi-
cable purposes not really paying tolls
since all of the earnings including tolls
would 20 to itself the said Canal Com
pany would have it within its power
to drive out of business those competing
lines, with heavy tolls to pay out of
their gross earnings, and hence in this
way the Canal Company could gain Il
monopoly of the transportation bust
ness through the canal and indeed could
force competing lines to sell out at a
nominal figure to it
Take for example, the case of the
Baltimore and Philadelphia Steamboat
Company. This Company now pays
about 100000 Il year to the Canal Com
pany in freight tolls and if their bill
should pass the Steamboat Company
would be compelled to pay approximate
ly $4,000 more in passenger tolls In
other words, before securing any net
profit. 1t muSt make SG5.OOO over and
above operating expenses, and at the
present time the net earnings of this
said Steamboat Company. according to
the statement of different parties only
en- Il, tnhput SsbS nll a