The Liberal democrat. [volume] (Liberal, Kan.) 1911-1924, 1915-01-08

to the state than does any other form
of private property.
In this connection, we wish to d.
gress for a moment to quote some
statistics which should have had a
place in former article. 1t costs
an average of mills per mile to
haul ton Of freight in the United
States, whereas in England it costs
2.33 cents, in Germany LAP cents,
and in France 1.41 cents In the
United States the average, wages paid
to railroad employees are 1923 per
day, in England $1,15, and in Ger
many and France not over 81 per
day. The English railroads are cap
italized at 900 per mile, in
France at $4,000 per mile, In Ger
many at $1l4,185-while in the Uni
ted States the stock and bond capt
talizauon averages only $4,000 per
mile, In view of. this remarkable
comparison, do American railroads
deserve the wholesale denunciation
which has been heaped upon them?
Losses on Passenger Traffic
In the application recently fled by
the Kansas lines before the State
| Public Utilities Commission for a
restoration of the three-cent passen-
ger fare, the Missouri Pacific filed
data showing that it had sustained a
loss on its Kansas passenger traffic
during the fiscal year ending June
! 80, 1913, amounting to $402 ,262.31.
For the fiscal year ending June 80
1914, the losses on its Kansas pass
enger traffic had increased to $449,-
469. 72--or $47,206.41 over the year
before.
The Rock Island filed data show
ing that it lost $60,632 during 1913
on its Kansas freight and passenger
business and that of this amount It's
$29,073. That its general losses
are rapidly increasing is also shown
by the fact that 1t only earned Fps
per cent on It's Kansas property in
1913 on both interstate and state
business, while in 1914 it earned
only LIS per cent on its Kansas in
vestment.
The Santa Fe filed evidence show
ing that in 1913 it lost $76,S33,27
business, while in 1914 the deficit
climbed to 25,673.9S. In view Of
these facts, is there a fair-minded
citizen in the state who will contend
that Kansas railroads are not emit
tied to a restoration OF three-cent
passenger fares?
Losses Growing Continually
From these figures. which are open
to absolute proof, it can be seen
that the Kansas lines are not only
sustaining loss amounting to hun
dreds of thousands of dollars annu-
ally on their passenger traffic, but
that with an ever-increasing cost of
operation these losses are constantly
growing heavier-and If the service
to the public is to remain efficient
and adequate, and if the railroad in
| vestments of the state are not to be
driven to the point of confiscation,
the people OF Kansas must, through
their rate-making authorities consent
to a return to the three-cent passen-
ger fare which was arbitrarily sus-
pended by the old Board of Railroad
Commissioners in / 1907 without due
regard for increasing labor and sup
ply cost or an adequate interest re-
turn upon the millions invested in
Kansas railroad properties. What
industry is there in the nation which
lcould have tolerated a reduction OF
one-third in its income on a large
volume of its business during the
last few years without coming to
grief?
-Four years ago, as Governor of
New York, Justice Hughes, of the
United States Supreme Court, vetoed
two cent passenger law enacted by
the Legislature on the ground that
1t was an arbitrary procedure which
did not take into consideration a
fair return upon the railroad prop
critics of that state-and few men
stand higher in the esteem of the
American people than this great jur-
| list who did perhaps as much as any
| other man in the country to break
| up illegal and unfair practices on
the part of large corporations.
So, too, the Supreme Court of
Pennsylvania held that two cent
passenger fare was unconstitutional
in that state because it was essen
| TALLY confiscatory. This high court
took the position that capital in
vested in railroads, as well as in
l-other lines of private property, is
entitled to earn per cent on a fair
capitalization and that the arbitrary
enactment of a two cent fare rem
dered such a return upon the lines
in Pennsylvania impossible. 1t also
took the position that railroads not
only have the right to insist upon a
fair return upon both freight and
passenger business, but that it isl
their duty to do so in order that one
class of patrons may not be COM
PEELED to pay ansinequitable rate TO
make up the losses sustained in an
other department.
If the arbitrary enactment Of a
two cent passenger rate is unfair to
the railroads of New York and Penn |
sylvania, where there are large CEN
tiers of population and where the
nations greatest density of freight
tonnage naturally exists, how much