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
I. C. C. Hearing on Private Cars, 1904, pp. 147–149. Mr. Brown,
counsel for the Santa Fe, said to the Senate Committee, 1905, that he
wished to put on record a sweeping denial that the A. T. & S. F. Co.
has made any discriminatory rates or paid any rebates. The next
moment, in answer to a question about the reduction of $25 a car below
the published tariff, to which Mr. Leeds testified as given by the
Santa Fe car-line, Mr. Brown said: “It was a rebate given to every
one.” (Rep. Sen. Com. on Interstate Commerce, May, 1905, p. 3140.) He
first said the road did not give any rebates, and then admitted it did
give rebates, but said it gave the same rebate to every one that
shipped. The coal mines that paid the Santa Fe $4 against $2.90 paid
by the Colorado Fuel Co. would hardly agree to that statement. But Mr.
Brown had in mind the car-line case in which they said the same rebate
was given to every shipper. Mr. Leeds said it was a secret rate, and
that he went to California and solicited business from various
shippers. Under such circumstances, the fact that every one who
shipped got the rebate does not eliminate discrimination but
accentuates it. The discrimination is against the man who does not
ship, the man who is not informed of the secret rebate. The Santa Fe
car-line informed such dealers as it chose. No others could afford to
ship on the Santa Fe. The instructed dealers could easily hold the
market at prices that would prevent the uninstructed from thinking
about shipping such goods.
Footnote 290:
Rep. 1904, p. 13.
Footnote 291:
Mr. Streychmans has been accused of stealing this code book and also
certain letters and papers, but in fact he took no original papers,
but only carbon copies of letters and statements he wrote for the
company, and the code book was put into his possession for use in his
work by the secretary of Armour’s general manager. If any charge of
stealing or any other criminal charge could be made, Streychmans would
long ago have been prosecuted by the Beef Trust people. When he began
giving publicity to the facts in his possession the general manager
tried to buy him off. He was shamefully treated by some of the Armour
officers, and partly in revenge, probably, and partly in gratitude to
the editor of the San Francisco _Examiner_ for helping him out of
California and the Armour grip, he gave the editor copies of letters,
etc., the publication of which led to his examination by the
Commission.
Footnote 292:
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