Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1913-11-19
Sizzling r. R. Com. Meeting
CONTINUED from rage one.)

Continued from rage One.) {
as facts IN the absence Of any wa:
to refute them, but felt confident TIL
losses could not be as great as stated
and that even IL such losses were
sustained, the general profit Of ths
line made it incumbent upon the roat
to furnish the best service, and tha
the figures did not accurately repre-
sent the exact income and expense O.
the road between Bismarck and Wish
elk, but included extraneous matter,
that when the people paid an extra
price for express matter they we're
entitled to receive it In less time 'han
cyu.d be done by freight. H. and
the other advocates Of the passenger
train advanced many reasons which
seemed good to them why the pres
ent service should be maintained.
Messrs. Conlslin, Lucas and Hoife!
spoke of the increased business the
passenger train had brought 10 the
city and Of it's great convenience 10
the people of t.hc city and along the
LIKE, as it enabled visitors from The
south to transact business here end
return home promptly, and all were
Of the opinion that the taking oil .,
inc train would be a backward step.
During the general discussion MI.
Derrick announced that If the pas
senger train was taken off at this
time it would be reinstated next
spring, eve though it continue TO be
run at a loss. The matter was taken
under advisement by the commission.
At 300 D. m. the question of the
rights of track buyers vas taken up,
the Northern Pacific road being a
protestant against recognition of this
class Of grain men was represented
by the officials mentioned above. The
grain interests represented by
Capt. /. P. Baker and several ger.
Element present took part in the dis,
cussfon. President Stutsman of the
commission said the matter was more
in the nature of a conference to get
the views Of the interests involved,
as application had been made by a
track buyer for a license, and as Op.
position had developed it was deem
ed wise to discuss the issue.
Capt. Baker said the track buyer
was a serious menace to the elevator
interests, inasmuch as he did bust
ness on little or no capital, had
small expenses and no responsibility,
while the regular warehousemen in
vested thousands of dollars, had hea-
Wy expenses of maintenance and were
responsible individually and by rea-
son of the bond furnished. He state
as a fact that the storage capacity
furnished by the %levators was in the
interest of the producer, as it served
as a check to the flow of grain to
market to cause low prices and block
ade at terminals and made a number
of points favorable to his contention
that the warehousemen were entitled
to consideration and protection for
their investments in buildings, other
wise the track buyer, If given recog-
milton by the commission, would
eventually prevent such investment
of capital.
Travelling Freight Agent J.@L. Burn
ham admitted that the 500 and Mil
waukee permitted track buyers Son,
their lines, but that his company did
not, except at one or two points,
where there were no elevators in op-
Grafton, for the reasons stated by
Capt. Bakr.
Division Superintendent .Strachan
said the general recognition of track
buyers would put the railroads out OF
business, owing to the tying up of
cars for long periods while being load.
ed. and cited instances of this kind
of delay to bear out his assertion and
otherwise protested agains licensing
this class of grain buyers. Letters
were in evidence from grain compan-
les in opposition to track buying, u.s.
ing practically the same arguments
as advanced by Capt. Baker. After
a general discussion the commission
took the matter under further con-
sideration.
The case of the; Mott branch train
service of the Northern Pacific was
represented by the officers named,
while John Charmley of Mott and -.
j.. Basquin Of Carson. and F. T..
Young of Bismarck appeared in op-
positionn o the changes There were
filed numerous petitions by travelling
men and people along. the branch
were on file.
Superintendent tStrachan stated the
case for the railroad and cited a mass
of figures in support of the company's
contention that the passenger train
was run at a loss and that no profit
lay in running a mixed train daily
on that branch. He said the passen>