Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1907-01-15
STATEWIDE PRIMARY LAW IS ADVOCATED

I received during the time I was
writing this part of my message:
In 1906 there was shipped from
| Chicago to Fairfield for the Louden
Machinery company % cars of bar
steel, having a total weight of $50, :
| TAI pounds.
Distance from Chicago to Fairfield
256 miles.
Distance from Chicago to Burling
| ton, 206 miles.
| Distance from Burlington to Fair
/! field. 90 miles.
Rate from Chicago to Fairfield, ID
cents per 100 pounds.
| Rate from Chicago to Burlington,
S cents per 100 hundred pounds.
Rate from Burlington to Fairfield,
cents per 100 pounds.
Freight charges for hauling these
% cars 206 miles, $490.37.
Freight charges for hauling these
% cars SO miles, 1854 SO.
| I'm this particular case, the freight
| for ne-fifth of the entire distance
the part in Iowa-is S294.22 more
than for the other four tifths of the
distance-the part in Illinois,
I'm 1906 the Iowa Malleable Iron
company of this city shipped in 1857
long tons of pig iron. Most of this,
| If not all, came from Chicago.
Rate from Chicago to Fairfield,
| $2.4 per long ton.
Rate from Chicago to Burlington
| 81. 90 per long ton.
Freight from Chicago to Fairfield
| on 1 1897 long tons. So, SS2 So
| Freight from Chicago to Burling-
| ton on L 597 long tons, 81 597 90.
! Freight charged from Burlington to
Fairfield, 1897 long tons, 81 235.-
So
freight on / ,597 tons for hauling
| so miles i'm Iowa, 50 ,235 80.
Freight on 1857 tons for haul
| ing 206 miles in Illinois, 81, 597 90.
I'm other words, the freight charges
| for hauling 1 ,597 tons of pig iron so
miles in Iowa are $685.. 80 more than
for hauling the same tonnage e06
miles in Illinois"
I understand perfectly that moth
ing you could do would affect a
through rate, but if it is to be the
settled policy of the railroads to make
the interstate rate, so far as Iowa
people are concerned, by adding the
local distance tariff from the state
line to the point of destination, it is
possible to 50 adjust our rates that
less injustice would follow their ap
/ plication in that manner.
AT the present time there are no
joint rates upon local tariff. The law
gives to the railroad commission the
authority upon specific application, to
establish Joint rate, but there is no
authority to prescribe a general
schedule of joint rates. The consti-
| tutionality of the existing statute was
at one time questioned but the case
In which 1t arose was determined up
| on another issue and therefore the
validity of the law is still undecided.
I recommend the subject to you as
one worthy of the most careful con-
sideration. 1t is believed by very
many of our manufacturers as we'll as
by large proportion of our general
shippers, that the law should be
amended so as to confer upon the
commission as complete power to
establish a schedule of joint rates,
embracing all railroads and all traf-
fic, as it now has to promulgate a
schedule Of rates over single lines.
Demurrage
! Two propositions VIII be admitted
without CONTROVERSY: First, that it is
the duty Of every railway company to
provide itself with sufficient motive
power and enough cars to carry the
freight offered to it with reasonable
prompitude, and to furnish these ia :
cilities without discrimination to the
shippers who ask for them; second,
lit is the duty of shippers and con-
signees to load and unload cars with
/ reasonable prompitude to the end
that each car may perform the maxi
mum of service. Shippers complain,
and in recent times the complaint has
been emphatic. that the railways do
not furnish cars as they should with
reasonable diligence and do not move
them. when loaded, with sufficient
speed; and that they do discriminate
between their patrons. The railway
companies complain that shippers and
consignees are not careful in loading
and Unloading cars when furnished
and to correct the latter evil they
impose a penalty for detention, which
is called, in railway parlance, de
murrage."
1t seems to me consistent with
good policy that the penalty should
be imposed upon both sides. If the
railway companies are remss in their
duty Of furnishing cars and moving
them, they should pay for their de-
linquency, and if the shippers and
consignees are negligent in returning
cars to service, they should pay for
their fault. I recommend the enact
ment Of law that will create a suf-
f1cient motive in both carriers and
shippers to do their full duty in this
regard.
Free Transportation
A year ago I gave to the general
assembly my views upon this subject,
and beg leave to refer to my form :
er message for full expression OF