The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1912-01-31
S. THOMPSON
WRITES ABOUT
DEEPER WATER
IN LETTER ANSWERING JACK
soNviLLE TIMEs.UNIoN col
ToRIALs HE STRONGLY ADvo.
GATES THE IMPROVEMENT or
WATER TRANSPORTATION AND
SAYS THIS WILL NOT INTER-
FERE WITH RAILROADS.

0@~
One OF the strongest arguments in
favor OF the deeper waterways move
statements OF the objects and purposes
Of the work proposed along this line,
which has yet been published is the
following letter from S. A. Thompson.
secretary Of the national rivers and
harbors COMMITTEES, to the Jacksonville
Times Union. Mr.. Thompson, who Is
one OF the best posted men in America
on the subject with which he is deal
ing. wrote this letter in reply to cer-
tain editorials In the Times Union.
The Letter.
Editor Florida Times Union, Jackson
VILE, Fla
Dear Sir: You sent me copies OF
my former communication but none
OF your further editorial utterance re-
garding The Doctrine as to Water
ways" Hence it did not come to my
notice until some days after 1t APP
You say: "A condition and not a
theory confro11ts us and we are seek
ing the law OF business underlying
present conditions when we present
certain facts and as to their applica-
ton and Interpretation. The
navigation Of q river is free: how can
the railroads compete for business
with the cheaper method?"
The answer to that question Is
easily given. II you will put one hun
bred miles of railroad alongside of .
river-this road to have no other
trackage and no connection with other
roads--there would be direct and fair
competition between the two methods
Of transportation, and the result would
he q division of the traffic; some
things would naturally go by water
and some by rail.
But when q railroad with seven or
eight thousand miles Of track comes
In competition with q waterway over
only one or two hundred miles Of its
trackage. the situation is entirely dif-
ferent. Rates can. be made low enough
between the points where the water
competition EXITS to drive the boats
out of existence, the losses incurred In
the operation being made up either
by charging unduly high rates at the
points where no water competition ex-
lists or by increasing the rates at the
river points sitter the water coTnpeti-
ton has been destroyed.
Unfair Competition.
AS an illustration, there was q time
when boats on the Trinity. river In
Texas were carrying cotton from Dali
las to Galveston for % cents to 81
per bale. The railroads cut the price
until the boats were driven on the
river, then raised the price to So per
bale.
Some years ago. when was en-
gagged in wholesale mercantile bust
ness, sold a bill Of goods to Gus
toner in Marquette. Michigan. While
We were located in Minneapolis, we
had a, storehouSe in Chicago, and
asked this customer If | should not
ship the goods by water from that
city. To my surprise he became
q sd IN
no. Don't do anything OF that sort"
When he was asked why he did not
care to take advantage of the much
lower rate. he replied: s"The railroad
people say that IL / do not give my
business to them IN the summer they
will not carry any goods for me in
the winter"
Talking to a former steamboat man
in Ottumwa- Iowa, not long ago, he
told me how he was driven out Of
business. Using round numbers for
the sake of convenience, he used to
carry a cargo of corn from Upper Mis-
sfsstppi river points to st. Louis for
1000. The railroads wanted the bust
ness and got It by hauling the corn for
So 900, with q rebate Of $1,000. These
are suggestive instances which show
that while the navigation of river is
free the railways can compete unsuc-
| cessfully for business with the cheap
er method.
Laws Have Helped soms.
You say further: Now what the
Times Union wants If statement OF
that law, business or statutory, which
will prevent the railroads from taking
possession Of these proposed canal
highways or Of driving business of
| them
A small beginning has been made in
the way of providing laws which allow
different methods of transportation to
exist side by side and carry on the
work for which they were created,
namely, the service Of the people.
Some teeth have been put into the
interstate commerce law, so that it is
! no longer legal to charge $64O more
/ Tor hauling carload of goods from
New York to Tucson, Arizona, than is
charged for taking a carload of goods
Inrougn Tucson S75 miles further to
The Mann Elhins law also provides
that when railroad rates have been
| reduced because OF water competition.
those rates cannot again be raised ex-
.cept by the submission of evidence
winch convinces the interstate com
nerce commission that the increase of
rates is justified by some change in
| conditions other than the iernins 4inY.
OF water competition.
4 Do Not Go Far Enuuuh.
| Inese provisions are good as far as
they 20, but they only go step where
we need to go a mile. / am unahle
to see why the rates which the rails
ways are willing to make in the face
OF water competition should not have
a controlling influence over the rates
which they are allowed to make where
such competition is absent This does
not necessarily mean that they must
make identical rates for equal mile
i age. We may find 1t desirable to
adopt modification Of the French law
and provide that the rates to points
| where there is no water competition
shall never be more than fifteen per
cent higher than. the rates made to
points where such competition exists.
| There Is no objection to the railways
making rates as low as they please
to meet water competition provided
rates to other points are made to cor
respond.
] am still of the opinion that we
| cotf1d wisely Srend n half hf1fiav, ,aof