The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1910-08-21
To the Editor of The Birmingham Age

To the Editor of The Birmingham Age
Herald:
The writer has read the absurd rea-
soning of Mr.. e. l.. Russell, vice presi-
dent of the Mobile and Ohio and South
ern roads. as printed In the Mobile Item
of Sunday, August IA, and the Bir-
nlingham Age-Herald of August IS and
notes Mr.. Russells fear that the Hart
we'll Tug Boat Trust mobile Towing and
Wrecl1ing company could induce masters
of incoming vessels to dock at the Tur-
ner-Hartwell docks, If the charges were
the same as those of the railroads under
the promise Of charging only half tow
age. Somebody told Mr. Russell this
nonsense and he has evidently never read
charter party Contract covering YES
sci charter) and really does not know
that the master of the steamer has moth
ing to do with the dock at which his
steamer shall land; that the movements
of the steamers are controlled by the
exporter or steamship agent to whom
chartered or consigned. Really, the vice
president of the Mobile and Ohio and
Southern, to properly discuss such mat
tiers, should begin to read export char
ters, export tariffs, should learn how
docks are conducted in such ports as
New Orleans and Galveston, which we
wish to rival and should school him
self generally upon export conditions IN
stead of depending upon others. We
attach clipping from Mobile Register or
August II, containing reply of Mr.. Hart
well (of the Mobile Towing and Wreck
ing company to Mr.. Russelrs charges,
which reply we ask you to publish.
Mr.. Russell stated that the writer had
made misstatements, and the writer chal-
lenges him to cite one single m1sstate-
ment and we will prove by facts or doc
uments what we have charged, and let
the public Judge who Is correct. just
mere talk, even from Mr.. Russell, Is
not satisfactory evidence in any serious
controversy, so he should submit facts,
definite and to the point, and not just
wordv declarations The Mobile and Ohio
seems able to rush into print whenever
their vice president thinks he can dis
tract attention from the real issue, the
determinations of the Mobile and ONO
and Southern, and put us on the oeien-
siye. vet they cannot answer the serious
questions put to them short time back.
Whv9 Does it not show their guilt and
that safety lies only In silence upon
certain subjects.
Mr.. Russell acknowledges the rates are
the same from st. Louis and other west
ern trade centers to Mobile, New Or
leans. etc. but states (erroneously that
these rates are the net rates TO railroads
and do not cover or embrace any ter
ninal charges, SuCll dS o"isSiHtio 1870
wharfage fees, which gives Mobile an
advantage over New Orleans All talk,
lust that and no more. Somebody told
Mr. Russell this, the writer would wager
that he has not read freight tarin NO.
1oooA-I C C No. Alps, to which his
company, together with rs other railroads
subscribes and which tariff reads from
st. Louis, Chicago and other trade cen
ters to shipside at Mobile, New Or
GoI,,astop and other ports. Real
lv. Mr.. Russell should read his tariffs,
mt TO save him unnecessary trouble,
wo will recite Item No. 9, page 20 OF
This tariff (Which tariff he is endeavor-
inc SO far as the Mobile and Ohio ana
Southern, to change to limit shipside de-
livery to only Mobile and ONO ana South-
ern rails):
1.-THE rates named In this tarlH ap-
NV to shipside and include all ex-
penses necessary to make such delivery
except as noted herein or as shown III
(refers to tariffs of certain roads work
ing in Texas territory principally and
will also include the limit of shfpside
delivery at Mobile If Mobile and Ohio
and Southern can succeed).
When shipments are to be exported
from Galveston and Texas City, Tex
the rates named herein include the
Galveston wharfage charge and other
necessary expense to make Wharf 'front.'
delivery.
From this the public can see that
the terminal charges are included In
the<export rates and further, the Mo-
bile and Ohio, working with the New
Orleans and Northeastern road to New
Orleans, is paying terminal charges at
New Orleans under this and other tar
ifs of from so to 81 per car switch
ing according to dock at which de-
livered) in addition to terminal
charge of cent per 100 pounds, trans
ferring or unloading, amounting to,
say SIS per car. Think of it-$7 to
SIP per car terminal charges at New
Orleans and to state that IS to So Quot
ing even Mr. RusselPs figures) terminal
charges allowed docks at Mobile, for
furnishing real frst-class docking IA
cilities is unjust despite the fact that
the Louisville and Nashville at Mobile
pay these same terminal charges Gas
they should for the charges are in
cluded in their rate) to make shipside
delivery at Mobile Docks company (Mo-
bile and Ohio wharves). What a po-
sition for the Mobile and Ohio and
Southern to assume.
Mr.. Russell states further that the
Mobile and Ohio and Southern do not