The evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1914-1922, 1915-03-30

commission No. 1879
r. ,. Johnson
The AichIaon. Topeka ana Santa re
Railway Company.
ANSWER.
For answer to the complaint IN me
above entitled proceeding The Atchl-
son. Topeka and Santa Re Hallway
company sayss u
II admi,s ms m Of nara
graph l.
II Il without Information as 80 the
nvcrments 81 p~afagrnph H.
III and IL.
Answering paragraphs m and ~.
L Nyn that on Iuly 2, 1914. the ON
plaintant requested the agent 81 the
defendant at Boston 10 reserve sleep
inE car space for him from Chicago
20 Williams. Arizona, on iis Califor-
MA limited train. No. Z. leaving Chi-
caEo Jply II. Section 4 wa assigned
20 defendant IN car 4. That assign
mcnt was afterwards cancelled and
section 2 In . I WAS reserved for the
complainant on California limited
train No. ., leaving Chicago July n,
and a ticket WIS ISSUED By the defend
ant FOR said train nom Chicaeo TO
Williams, Arizona. ~ aforesaid.
Defendant further says hat con-
%plalnant was at the time fully In
formed BY the aeenta Of the defend
ant and had known from his own cx-
perience that the said California lin
tied train No. , was, Dy widely pub
lished and notorious regulation Of the
defendant. a through transcontincntal
train for the accommodation OF Pac-
Inc coast travel only. and that the
putting down and taking up OF pas-
sengers at intermediate points was
confined to junction poi1ts. such ne
williams. Arizona. where through
transcontinental passengers max side
trips TO the Grand Canyon OF Arizona,
or az Ash Fork, Arizona. where such
passengers make side trips 10 Phoe-
nix and the salt River valley and 20
the region irrigated b. the Roosevelt
dam.
Defendant further says hat at The
time u was operating out OF Chicago
three other transcontinental trains
daily by which travel 10 intermedi-
ate points was very adequately ac-
cOmmodated and upon which COM
p~iainant could have gone to Albu-
auerque or to the Pacific coast. one
81 which trains. namely, Train No. .,
was as fast a train as said California
limited train Nc. .. and that each Of
said trains was carrying 1rst-class
equipment and standard Pullman
sleeping cars with just such accom-
modRtions as complainant reserved
and paid for on said California lin
tied train Nc. 3.
Answering paragraph Y, the, &C.
PENDANT says hat It's published tar
ifs at the time will show what the
rail a r was from Aibuquerque to
Williams.
VI.
Answering paragraph VI. defend
ant says that the conduct 81 the con-
1uctor Of trnia No. 3. as states. was
Ia accordance with the rules Of the
defendant and proper.
Defendant further says that COM
plainant was not entitled TO a re-
funder OF any part OF the published
rate which he had paid for tire ticket
from Chicago to Williams. and IL
says that complainant was not EMIT
led legally 70 ride from Albuquerque
To san Diego. California. on a ticket
from williams. Arizona. 10 San Diego.
California. and that the defendant
acted legally In requiring the COM
p~lainant To pay fun fare from Alba
querque TO san Diego when he re-
sumed his journey westward from Al
buquerque.
VII.
Answering paragraph VII. defend
ant denieH that the said rule was an
unlawful or unreasonable discrim-
ination against Albuquerque. II says
hat this regulation mentioned was
necessary 10 protect Tor the defend
ant the earning power OF said
through train TO California. for The
sale OF "a section or "A drawing-rOom
or a compartment from Chicago 10
Albuquerque would operate 60 deny
such space 10 "A traveller desiring to
so 10 California and the defendant
would thereby lose 60 some competi-
tor the carriage Of such through pas
senger and would also haul west from
Albuquerque said space unoccupiec.
the population OF New Mexico being
too sparce to supper such q train
west -bounG. while the population In
the regions OF Chicago and Kansas
City Il 90 dense that during much a.
the year said California limited train
Is run in two or more sections. F0r
these reasons the loss OF long-haul
%patr0naFe 90 the defendant from
Chicago, the Missouri river and other
points east thereof would be very
srcat without the regulation men-
toned.
Further answering said paragraph,
defendant admits that az the time
mentioned Il has but three Other
other transcontineutal trains from
Chicago 20 the Pacific coast all OF
which trains carried STANDARD pull
man sleeping cars and all Of which
carried passengers between Chicago
and Albuquerque. II says that COM
p%lainant could have purchased a
ticket from Chicago 20 Albuquerque
and could nave secured on said trains
the same sleeping car accommoda-
tions as ne occupied on said Califor-
mia limited train No. 3. 10 also adj
mits that but one Of said trains car
ried a dining car and that only be-