East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1907-07-03

The following self-explanatory let
ter from Assessor c. p. Strain of
Umatilla county, regarding the de-
mand for a local train on the o. Il. &
n. between Pendleton and Portland
fully explains Mr.. Strains position on
that subject and gives his reasons for
furnishing the railroad commission
with an affidavit regarding the asti-
mated passenger traffic which wHuld
be available for such train. Mr..
Strains letter is as follows:
Pendieton, Ore, July 3.-(Editor
East oregonian Having noticed in
your issue of July 2, that my position
in relation to the proposed local pas
senger train between Pendletml and
Portland has aroused inquiry among
the business men of this city ar to the
reasons for my position, will state
them briefly II you will kindsy grant
me space in your paper.
/ view the transportation problem
from the standpoint of the average
person. Here is the traffic which the
people furI ish. There is The railroad
which capital constructs. Yonder is
the law making power of the state.
Beyond 1t the constitution ct the state
and nation and the courts Tor consti-
tutional Interpretation.
II is the purpose of the producer to
reach market, and of the consumer
to secure goods from distant markets.
The producer and consumer must
have transportation facifries. They
want to get these as cheaply as posi-
BILE consistent with convenience and
good service.
The owner of railroads tas but one
object and that is profit He desires
maximum. charge for n minimum
service. His interest and that of the
people, generally, naturally clash.
The liawmaking power RIust, of ne
cessity regulate transportation in or
der to settle the differences between
the owner and the user of 1ransporta-
tion facilities.
But our constitutions provide that
private property, and railrsnd proper
~ is private property, can not be con-
fiscated by law. 1t follows, therefore,
that railroads. have a righi ITO charge
enough, and to reduce their equip
ment sufficiently. to enable them to
return net income upon their fair
and reasonable cost.
Hence, II we reduce mel earnings
by piling up operating expenses, we
forfeit our right to that extent, to the
benefits of cheaper transportation.
a local passenger train would, in
my opinion, serve only to aid a mere
convenience to few people. l do
A.xI. On
900 residents of this county make a
trip as often as once a year to Port
land. I have no doubt, however. that
more than 1000 tickets are sold to
Portland during a year. but several
OF these often go to the same man.
The local train as convenience
would not give an equal distribution
of benefits. Because the great ma
jority of the people of the county WHO
produce and distribute its produrts
would not use the train.
should Lower Freight Rntes.
II proposition were made to
cheaper the articles which we all use
upon our tables. in our homes, in our
business. ! would be In favor OF 1T.
1t would be better, for instance. to
cheaper the fruit which comes to us
from the Miton-S'reewater country,
by reducing the freight upon 1t and
by improving the railroad facilities
for handling 1t than to dissipate rail-
road earnings by pilfng up operating
expenses for what would be, at best, a
mere convenience for a few.
My position in regard to the tax
phase of the question was correctly
stated editoria,iy in the East Orego-
nian yesterday.
In conclusion, 1t would be better, In
my opinion, for Pendleton and the