The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1912-12-27
RAILWAYS PREY ON SHIP
PERS FOR RICH GRAFT
tcontinued From PAGE One,

trail for taking the car 10 the team
track and SO for what was called
team track delivery" The rival
| manufacturer was charged 81 by the
Michigan central for switching the
car to the team track, and 81 for team
track delivery. While Mr.. Haggerty
paid $40. his competitor paid IS for
the same service, except that Mr. Hag-
gerty had TO use two railroads, while
his competitor used but one.
II must be remembered that there
are hundreds OF manufacturers in and
about Detroit who are forced TO use
the railroads to deliver their products
to certain private sidings or public
team tracks about the city, just as
Mr.. Haggerty does.
Patrick H. Kelley, recently elected
ongressman-at-large, insisted, on be
half of Mr.. Haggerty, that the charge
of So for team track delivery OF Mr.
Haggerty's car constituted discrimina
ton. since his competitor paid but 81
I This point was sustained by the su
preme court
The railroads, nevertheless, contin
ne TO make discriminatory charge
for delivery to public team tracks
while the case Is pending In the fed
eral courts
Mr.. Kelley brought out the fact that
freight may be delivered in three
ways AT freight stations, at private
sidetracks. and at public team tracks.
Such delivery Is required by law. The
erection and maintenance OF freight
stations Is costly to the railroad com
panies, and. II all deliveries were made
at these stations the railroads would
be forced out OF business. Many plants
have built private sidings. the cost OF
which Is paid by the plants, but 10 re-
Lated to them by the railroads accord
ing 70 the amount OF business which
the plants give them-an arrangement
entirely legal and satisfactory. But
many businesses are of such a nature,
and are so situated, that II Ia incon-
venient for them to handle their
freight through stations, and impossl-
BILE for them TO have private sidings.
For these concerns, public team
tracks for the loading and unloading
OF cars have been provided, and
| freight must be carried TO and from
these tracks on trucks.
Now the Michigan Central, as Mr..
Kelley showed, while II charged Mr..
Haggerty's competitor 81 for deliver
| ing a car To team track, charged
Mr.. Haggerty SO for the same service.
and would have charged neither OF
them anything II delivery had been
made to an Observation-Disclosures
station.
Mr.. Kelley could see no reason for
this discrimination. Neither could the
Michigan railroad commission. Meth
er could the supreme court.
An engineer who had made a care
! fnl study OF the situation testified that
25.2 cents a day would be more than
an ample sum TO charge for the use
OF team track by one car.
In the opinion OF the shippers who
carried this case to the commission,
| II is one OF the most important ever
brought for II the decision is upheld
In the federal courts II will mean the
saving OF millions OF dollars annually
to shippers throughout the country.
THE case showed the power which
can be welded By union OF shippers
against railroad domination and autoc.
racy," said one Of the shippers who
assisted In pushing the case zone
shipper alone is practically powerless
to enforce his rights. Organizations
which are supposed to protect ship
pers, but which have many other
duties, find that these duties prevent
them from single-minded attention 10
the shippers problems. II would be
an easy matter for an organization oil
Detroit shippers, hiring a competent
attorney, to secure better and cheaper
service from the railroads"