The heart of the railroad problem: The history of railway discrimination in the United States, the chief efforts at control and the remedies proposed, with hints from other countriesParsons, Frank
History
The heart of the railroad problem: The history of railway discrimination in the United States, the chief efforts at control and the remedies proposed, with hints from other countries
Parsons, Frank
Railroads -- Freight -- Rates -- United States; Railroads and state -- United States
Barton, one of the independents, had a contract to supply all the bulk
salt used by Swift & Co., at Missouri River points. The contract expired
April 1, 1903. Before asking renewal of the contract Barton went to the
coal people and the railroad to see what his costs were to be for the
coming year. He found that coal was to be advanced 25 cents a ton and
freight on it 25 cents a ton, making 50 cents a ton more on coal. As it
takes 1 ton of coal to produce 2 tons of salt, the increase in coal cost
meant 25 cents added to the cost of each ton of salt. Barton’s former
contract was on the basis of $2.25 at Hutchinson, now he must have
$2.50. While Barton was negotiating a renewal of his contract with the
Swifts, Hon. Frank Vincent, State Senator, manager of the Salt Trust,
and director in the Salt Trust railroad at Hutchinson, took a vacation
from the legislature, went to see the Swifts, and offered them salt on
the basis of $2.10 at Hutchinson, or 40 cents less than the independents
could afford to sell it. The Trust got the contract with Swift. This
gives an idea of the extent to which the railway favoritism enabled the
Trust to underbid the independents.
The owner of one of the independent salt plants was asked: “From where
did you meet most competition, as far as you know?” “From the Santa Fe
Railroad,” he replied.
One of the most remarkable facts in the case is that the division of
rates with the Salt railroad was made without even taking the trouble to
find out whether or no there was any railroad at all of any kind behind
the name presented in the request for a division.
“MR. MARCHAND. Then you entered into this joint arrangement with the
Hutchinson and Arkansas River Railroad without really knowing whether
there was any road there or not?
“MR. BIDDLE. I have done that hundreds of times.”[253]
Another indication that the terminal railroad is not the real reason for
the division of rates is found in the fact that it is not every large
shipper who can get a rebate by owning a private railroad. One of the
independent salt mills, the Matthews mill, had a switch built and paid
for and expected to get a rebate of $1 a car on the strength of it. But
the railroad refused to give any division of rates. Matthews did not
belong to the Morton family, nor have any other special claim to
hospitality at the hands of the Santa Fe.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account