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
Mr. Baker has deducted operating expenses, repairs, and a liberal
allowance for depreciation, but he has not allowed for fair interest
upon the capital invested in the cars, a charge amounting to $650,000 a
year which should be deducted from the $2,800,000 in order to get the
portion of the mileage payment which is really equivalent to “an
old-fashioned cash rebate,”—an article that is not so old-fashioned,
however, as to be out of use, by any means, as we have seen.
Wherever it serves their purposes the car-lines share their rebates with
important shippers. This has been of special service in inducing large
shippers like the fruit growers of California and the South to give
their trade to the profit-sharing car-lines. The car-lines would pay
shippers a bonus on condition that such shippers would call on the
railroad for the cars of the agreeing car-line. Both refrigerator lines
and stock car-lines use this method. Sometimes half the mileage is paid
to the favored shipper. Sometimes $10 or $15 or even $25 and $35 a car
is paid back to the shipper by the car-line, which is of course a rebate
pure and simple, and has precisely the same effect when paid by the
car-line as if paid by the railroad directly to the shipper.
The Santa Fe car-line found it necessary to give a rebate of $25 a car
in California in order to get traffic in competition with the Armour
Car-Lines and on shipments going beyond Chicago the rebate that seemed
necessary to get business was $35 a car. So Mr. Leeds, the manager of
the Santa Fe car-line testified in April 1904 before the Interstate
Commerce Commission. Part of Mr. Leed’s testimony in answer to the
questions of the Commission and of its counsel Mr. Marchand was as
follows:[288]
“MR. LEEDS. This is the first year that we entered into the deciduous
fruit business in Northern California, and I met the competition which
we found there when we began business.
“MR. MARCHAND. What competition?
“MR. LEEDS. I think it amounts to $25 a car.
“MR. MARCHAND. $25 a car?
“MR. LEEDS. Yes, sir.
“MR. MARCHAND. By whom?
“MR. LEEDS. We had only one competition.
“MR. MARCHAND. Who was your competitor?
“MR. LEEDS. The Armour Car-Line.
“MR. MARCHAND. And it was necessary to give $25 or more in order to
secure the traffic—was that your idea?
“MR. LEEDS. I believed so.
“COMMISSIONER CLEMENTS. Uniformly $25 a car?
“MR. LEEDS. I think there would be some exception, as to business
farther east than Chicago.
“COMMISSIONER CLEMENTS. Would it be more than that?
“MR. LEEDS. Yes, sir.
“COMMISSIONER CLEMENTS. What on Eastern business?
“MR. LEEDS. An additional $10.
“COMMISSIONER CLEMENTS. $35?
“MR. LEEDS. Yes, sir.
“COMMISSIONER CLEMENTS. You pay $25 back to Chicago and points west of
Chicago?
“MR. LEEDS. Yes, sir.
“COMMISSIONER CLEMENTS. And $35 to points east of Chicago?
“MR. LEEDS. That is what it would amount to.
“COMMISSIONER PROUTY. Do you agree to do that before the shipment is
made, or afterwards?
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