Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1909-09-23

ric and We think that the developwent
our here-therc Is no city around this
paN on the country Thar has bnit nm
more rapidly Than has salt Lake In tho
ieHt Two or three yoars-is shown on
tvsIy hand. There Is an impression that
,,e'su' ,etes cut great deal more OF a
nkuFe tnan they really do have f,,
count that some OF these men her, in
we JoDbing o. goods. getting what thev
beneNe 20 b. ca legitimate prnHt ar.
settng more money for their services
IN taxing package out OF IA rari.sd az
freight received from the cast ,nd
throwing u into the hands OF tho com.
sumner than the carrier gets from Chi
CHto' ond the whole question ls. are we
SUNS freight rates so high as 90 re-
tHlu the development of tho busin.4s
ana development OF the countrt. Itisa
matter or history that there \. not "a
common carrier known ion the country
that makes a pront equal To that which
commercial Interests return ever, wear
MI. bdbcock-Mr Munroe. going back
70 mat period when the Rio Gr,nd.
nrst came into Utah that YOU refer 10
ana following the rate Generalization,
a pool was formed immediately after
that rate war. was II notf
MI Munro think ID was did
not az that time have much 10 do with
the u tab business and only sponk nm
orally. from recollection.
Mr. BabcuCk-Do Won roireu,l,.r
whether that pool was effective I'm ac-
complaining the maintenance OF rates
or not?
Mr. Munroe-That was in 1854 about
tWo or three years prior 20 the inter
state law of 1881 why. naturally the
object of pooi would be- TO get a fair
return. and no doubt the rates were
restored TO a reasonable normal basis.
DOES NOT Rl9MEMBpR.
Mr. Babcock -Was the pool e0ectual
IN accomplishing the maintenance, then,
Of tariff rates?
Mr.. Munroe-I don't recall speciacal-
~ ] would assume that il must have
maintained rates, for q time but Il WAS
about three or four years prior 10 the
Interstate law.
Mr.. Babcock-The pool was broken up
upon tpo going into operation Of the
Interstate commerce law
Mr. Munroe--lt may have. don't re-
call the date % the expiration. but il
did not continue thereafter. ! am sure
Of that
Mr. Babcook What is the original
basis OF freight rates between Utah
common points and California termin-
ais. and how II IL arranged
MT Munroe-Tha california Utah
common point basis Is 60 per cent of
the river substantially q mileage basis
There was time when q was S5i5 per
cent based on mileage via Niles TO
san Francisco, and the reimbursement
was based ON the nearest common pofnt
which was Omaha. on the river. aud
Sacramento In California. That Is Der
cent basis is practically "a mileage basis
predloated on ga miles first 10 Sacra-
mento from ogden, and a thousand
miles from Omaha TO ogden
Mr. BabcOck Tho original basis
was using mileage from Omaha to
Ogden and ogden 10 san Francisco
MI Munroe-That Is my recollection.
Mr., Babcock Why did they change
then, in using the nearest common
pointf
Mr.. Because in the system
Of common points the Omaha rates
obtain from the other points on the
river. Notwithstanding the greater
service That being true. Won could
not ask for the application OF prin-
ciple on the Missouri river and take
the same principle I'm California at
the central California terminals.
hence n resolved itself between
Omaha on the east and Sacramento on
the west
Mr.. Babcock-As a matter Of fact
wasn't the 75 per cent purely arbi-
tfary ana given at the demand Of
the southern Pacific?
RESULT OF CONFERENCE.
Mr. Munroe-The Southern Pacific
made the demand and it was establish
ed as a result of the conference for
the reason, an l said before. that II
was substantial classifler and we
uld not think there was anything UNI
fair in the proposition
Mr. bcock-That was not the
reason the Southern Pacific people
gave for asking the lower basis
Mr. Munroe-The Southern Pacific
people felt that the So y per cent was
unfair TO their interests
Mr. Babcock-Do you know If this
lt per cent basis applies la both
directions on both class and commod-
ity rates.
Mr.. Munroe-I think IL does. There
was time when we had a difference
in scale with the difference In direc-
ton, but / think il Is uniform now.
Mr.. Babcock-Do you consider these
class rates profitable TO the carriers
the SO rate?
Mr. Munroe-Under the oircum-
stances. yes
Mr. Babcock--In your judgment are
these commodity rates remunerative
to carriers. so far as your line IS
concerned?