The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-03-16

credited with only So per cent OF the
gross earnings of SG2,10907 for carry
ing United States mail or so2a5.93,
and sucl@ intrastatc passenger train
revenue Is only credited with per
cent. Of the gross earnings OF Sis
sl4S6 for carrying express I1tter or
ST12S.S9. while the expense of carrying
such insrastatc mail and express is
charged on the basis of intrastute pas
serger3 mileage With 20,jo per cent.
Or the expense OF doing that bus; :
ness. In other words, the figures.
when anaiyzea, show that while the In
trastate earnings on United states mail
are only credited with s2,236.53 those
earnings arc charged with S7.72G as
the expense Of doing that business.
The same error Is repeated In deal
while the intrastatc revenue is only
credited With s7.12S.so, 1t is charged
with 2o.59 per cent OF the expense or
doing the business. or Sl4,1S3.5o.
With these figures revised. and
charging the intrastate passenger train
revenue with expenses based upon the
revenue received, or So per cent, the
revenue on United states mail is
sG3T5l7. and on the same basis, chang
ing express revenue with 8 per cent.
of the expense Of doing ii, the differ
cnce in favor OF the jntrasiate revenue
on express business IS Sio.4T5.53. So
that the apparent deficit OF s3.23C.51
above referred TO on passenger train
revenue is Cancelled, and accepting the
figures OF the company. and fairly an
alyzing them. profit upon passenger
train intraState business Is shown
amounting 20 s13,Sli,l3. That the re-
suits here stated may be clearly APP
pretended, the said statement filed
by the company. together with an adj
ditional statement relating to the
United States mail and express rev
enue and expenses. are hereto append
ed as "A part OF this opinion
Expense Provided For.
There Is III this table another item
charged against the intrastatc freight
revenue which should not be over
looked. That revenue IS charged with
10 per cent. OF the gross intrastate
freight revenue as the excess OF the
expense Of doing the local freight bus
mess over the average business,
amounting to sl1.24S.54 The theory
upon which this charge Is made Is that
X costs more to do intrastate freight
business than It docs to do the entire
freight business. II this be admitted
70 be true, 1t you'd seem that at least
In the case of this railr rad such addi-
tional expense has been fully provided
Tor without the addition OF this arbi-
trary and estimated charge For It
appears from the evidence S,ibnittc ed
Dy the company that although tho
intrastatc freight constitutes only SIS
per cent. OF the total tonnage, yet II
mas already been charged In that state
tnent With 3.36 per cent. OF the expense
OF doing the total freight business and
that while the average revenue per
ton from all business Is co cents, tie
average from !utrastate Is so cents
per ton further appears from the
evidence that the intrastatc freight
in revenue per ton mile. So that II
would seem that the additional expense
OF doing the interstate freight bust,
ness has already been provided for
oy this company by such expense
charged and such higher freight rates
Profit, Not DcGcit.
we believe, therefore, that the ta bio
OF figures presented by tho com pa ny,
and relied upon to demonstrates its
proposition that the present cents
per mile maximum rate for IN trasta q
passengers is confiscatory, SO far from
sustaining that allegation quite plain
~ demonstrates that there isa small
proht and not deficit arising from
this class or business
The question which we arc 10 con.
slider. however. IS whether such rate
yields fair and reasonable prptit is
the company without imposing undue
hardship upon the travelling public.
Taking q broad Wow of the railway
situation In this state, and having al
ready established g standard maximum
rate of . 70 cents per mile per passcn
ger, the question TO be determined is
whether the Richmond. Fredericksburg
and Potomac Railroad Company should
/ be allowed TO charge a similar rate.
While tho density of passenger trav.
ci upon this line is greater than on
many other lines IN the State. and
while we believe on account Of It's
large interstate earnings that IT 4;
in a position TO continue to maintain
lis present > cent rate without undue
hardship. We still believe that. taking
All the circumstances Into consjdera
ton, 2ls cents per mile per passenger
Is fair rate for the service rendered.
The fact that it has a good location.
Is we'll organized. has conducted It's
affairs with economy and skill. and has
/ built UP prosperous business, Is to
It's credit and its stockholders are en-
titled TO all fair profits and dement's
arising from their investment
II is the duty OF tho company to
serve the public properly and at rea-
sonable and just rates, and there Is
q IeriProcaI duty on tho part OF the
pubic TO pay reasonable prices for
the services rendered
On Pnr with Others
while we cannot accedc.to the com
pany's contention that 1t should have
8 cents per mile per passenger as its
maximum passenger rate. We think
that it Is entitled to the same rate
which has been permitted TO the other
standard railways in the State. namely.
a maximum rate ofr2ts cents per mile.
we know of no good reason for allow
ing this road to charge more, and think
mat there Is no sufficient reason for
recurring 1t to charge less
The company now has on sale mile
age books at cents per mile CORE
spending with those OF other stand
ard roads. and has for long time
maintained large number Of very
cheap communication rates. The aver
age rate at which these communication
tickets are sold is seven-tenthe ne ).