Arizona republican. [volume] (Phoenix, Ariz.) 1890-1930, 1907-06-05

a mile each way" A and B are botf
the state of Maryland ana the railroad
being a common carrier has no right
to charge b one price and A another
and much lower price when the service
performed is exactly the same-in this
instance conveying their persons from
one city to another. Ii might be argued
that because A makes six trips a week
he is entitled to a lower rate than Il
who makes only one trip a week or one
year. Yet this argument is refuted
! by the very foundation of rate regu-
latio:i, for If A, because of the fire.
quency with which he offers his per-
son to be transported between two
points is entitled to a more favorable
rate for such transportation, then Y
who ships a hundred tons OF freight a
day should be entitled to a more IA
vorable rate than Y who ships a hun
dred tons a year. From the standpoint
of the railroads as a purely business
proposition. the discrimination in favor
of A against b is good policy. So it
is in the case of y against Y. but dis
elimination in the latter case is for
hidden. If A should ship a hundred
car loads of freight from Baltimore to
Washington he would pay the same
rate as Il shipping one ear load. Why
he should have a lesSrate than Il when
it comes to the transportation OF their
persons is not exactly clear. when the
proposition is viewed from the stand
point of Il.
To be common carriers railroads
must be operated, and accompanying
the process of operation there is the
incident Of obtaining revenue TO pay
operating expenses. Its costs the rail-
road a certain sum to run a train from
Washington to Baltimore, merely as
an illustration. 1t has been carrying
on the average fifty commuters at fif-
~ cents the round trip and fifty
casual passengers each way at three
cents a mile or s1.20 each, a total of
$40 for the round trip per casual pas
senger. The income from this train
would then average s25 from the COM
muters and s120 from the casual pas
sengers, n total of sl45. Now suppose
the Maryland legislature puts a limit
of cents a. mile on the railroads. The
rate for ordinary tickets then becomes
40 miles. and the income Of the train
shrinks sl05 per round trip. The rail-
road naturally seeks to make up this
difference. 1t is prevented by law from
collecting IL from the casual passen-
gers and must necessarily fall back
on the commuters. Thus from the
standpoint of y who occasionally trav-
els. the Legislature did a wise thing in
fixing tht limit at cents a mile, but
from the standpoint OF B. the COM
muter. the railroads are running him
by raising the rate he-has been enjoy
ing. On the other hand. IL the railroad
does not raise the rate to a. then the
income will not meet expenses and the
rate to p becomes ineffective because
its forcible application would be con-
fiscatory. Therefore. it seems, that
for the BIS to profit the AS must suf-
fer. 1t cannot be denied that theoret-
ically while railroads can and do dis
criminate. the government cannot as
between its citizens. II one man i'm
ports hundred tons OF steel plates he
pays the same rate of duty as IL he |
imported a million tons. A man who !
buys a postage stamp once a year gets |
il at the same price as though he |
bought a thousand dollars worth |
day. So. il the government regulates |
the cost Of transportation for freight |
or persons by rail ii is difficult to see |
how II can authorize the creatures |
which IT is regulating I'd discriminate
its citizens.