Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 48, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 26 December 1884 — SPEECH OF HON. T. J. WOOD. [ARTICLE]

SPEECH OF HON. T. J. WOOD.

In the House of Representatives, December 11,1884. The House having under consideration the bill (h. r. 5481) to establish a board of commissioners of interstate commerce and to regulate such commerce— Mr. Wood said: Mr. Speaker: Ra ilroads ha ve been constructed over the country so rapidly in the few years past, ‘ana were so desired by the people in every part, that railroad companies were granted very liberal and in some cases very extensive powers in statutes and charters. These powers belonged to the government granting them, but they can not be forfeited or repealed, as vested rights have intervened. No industry has developed more than railroad building in the same time, the aggregate capital of which is placed at 6,000,000,00\ and the number of miles at 125, — This vast system is powerful for good to the people and the country, and is equally powerful for abuse and wrong, and we find that human rapacity is as strong in the conduct of railroads as in other kinds of business.

Ordinarily abuses and wrongs between individuals, business firms, or corporations can be remedied and redressed in the local courts, or if there is no existing remedy the Legislature may grant one; but here is a business so enormous as to span the continent and i$ penetrating the interior of every State in every direction, bringing along great good to the country, developing the waste and forest, building villages, enlarging towns to cities, and stimulating and starting useful industries among the people. Yet with all these great’ vantages following comes also great abuses and gross wrongs to individuals and business, and necessarily there is no adequate remedy by resort to local authority. I think the General Government should exercise the power, which I believe is not denied now, to remedy the abuses charged to exist The railroad companies need not fear Fedeial statutes and pen alties as long as they conaact* • fair and legitimatebusiness, and a fair remedial statute cannot menace capital in an honest undertaking. The enactment of a fair law to remedy abuses charged can not harm honest railroad business or suppress new entetprises. The law can only affect such railroad corporations as are engaged in systematic wrong-doing, and it will have no force whatever against honest dealing and legitimate business. It is contended that there is a difference of mind as to what is wrong or abusive in railroad practice or management. There is in all human conduct. The action of the law-making cower, consistent with the organic law of the country, is decisive of that question. It is fair to say that no legislative power in this country would declare certain conduct in business a crime without just cause or reason for it. I would only support a bill up to a law that would remedy abuses in railroad management. I would encourage all their legitimate traffic. Which measure is the better, the committee bill or the Reagan substitute? The main difference in them is, the committee bill provides for a commission while the substitute does not, and the substitute prohibits a g-eater charge per mile fora abort haul than for a long one. I submit these are substantial (inferences, and I must favor the substitute for the committee bill. There has beeu a good deal

I of declamation about the great j benefits of a commission.— | They are mostly imaginary. ; Suppose a commission is established under the committee | bill. It is to sit in Washington or adjourn to other parts when it deems it necessary.Very well. What is the practice? The shipper is to complain to the commissioners in writing. He lives in my district, nine hundred miles away and he must send his complaint to Washington: or if he lives in the South or tar West he mußt send his complaint to Washington Then what?— The commissioners investigate How? Go where the shipper lives and does business, and take testimony? Or require him to employ an attorney and send his deposition, and possi bly hire an attorney in * ashington to argue the merits of his case before the commission? After hearing his side then they are 1o send for the railroad company, perhaps doing business in Kansas, for such information as it has on the subject.

local freight than is paid by | other shippers, and this is true i whether there are competing lines of railroad or not. The 1 effect of this preference is to ; build up one shipper at the | expense of others, and thus affecting all the people—the producer, laborer; and shipper. | It is safe to say that the pre- { ferred shipper does not pay less than reasonable rates; but if he did, then the company could pot continue business unless it charged more than a reasonable rate to other shippers in order to make good the loss. . thte be done, then an unjust favoritism is granted by which he reaps large gains, not only at the expense of other shippers who pay his freight charges in the payment of their own unequal charges, but also at the expense of the laborer and producer, from whom the preferred shiuper buys—whether it be the product of the farm, the factory, mill, or the shop, for the price of all such products is fixed in part -by the cost of shipment to a given point. Transportation charges are always considered in establishing the prices of commodities. Then we have the preferred shipper buying flour at $5.50 per barrel, the market price at the place of production, and shipping it to another point, the freight rate on which is 50 cts., regular schedule rate. This makes the barrel of flour worth $6 per barrel at the place of delivery.

Now the farrqer must pay labor and raise wheat at a price fixed after considering the cost of flour per barrel and cost of shipment to the given point. hese fix the price of Ins bushel of wheat and the price of his .wheat fixes the price he pays for labor. Now if the preferred shipper only pays 25 cents per barrel by a secret contract for shipment to the given point, when the regular schedule rate is 50 cts, clearly he derives 25 cents from the wheat-raiser, the laborer and the flour maker. It enables him to reap large gains from the laborer and Producer in other useful industries, for which he gives no equivalent, and it is an injustice that can not be defended. It enables him to continue a prosperous business, while other shippers feeding him all the while are not able to do so well, thereby injuring the growth of competive industry

me in'of it at the main or special of flic he shall have a eeriaiu amount r* funded. Why is this done? To de ceive the public? It is the same false pretense and favoritism. Trans mu tation charges over public ways is the same thing us a tax on all aiti** eles transported. Why tax one man more than nother engaged in the same business? It would bo no worse for the toxing power in any State to tax one man more t; an it taxes another, or that the tax eol Sector should polled the fixed rate of tax on a certain individual’s proper y and afterward refund tj hun naif of it on the ground that he was a big tax payer c.tid influential citizen. The act is so unfair and un qua! as to become unconscionable. and I would make it a crime and declare a penalty. There areinstauees of fr> ight carriage that appeal strongly for rebates anc in such cases the law ought to permit the facts to < ome o.ut fully before the court or jury hearing the case, and if it is found to be fair and reasonable it should be a good defense under the law. I would like to gee section S of the substitute amend ed so as to allow the Tacts to come ont, and let the court or jury determine whether they constitute a defense or not

I ct me now to the other question of pooling. Pooling contracts between divers competing lines of railroads are made to cut off all cotupe: tinn in the haul* iug oi freight. It does aot benefit the people or the patrons of the roads. It does ben fit »be railroad vompan* ies, because tht. pooling contract es tabiishi s and maiutains certain char ges wholly fixed by the parties to the pooling contract. It is wholly onesided in its execution aud effect Skippers and other patrons of the roads aie not consulted at all; their interest is no considered in these contracts. The producer has no voice in making ihe pooling contract. It does prevent houest competition in freight hauling. I L *’w it is claimed that competing lines eau not survive without pooling u. n tracts. that is, the strongest line will desttoy the others, but that the pooliug contrast protec s all the lines.

I think it does protect all the lines from reasonable comp tition, but I deny that eompeti iou would destroy any rival line of railroad. Il would have the effect to reduce freights to leasonaDle rates, aud it can not be i iesumed that any competing line of railroad would mark down freight charges below the reasonable limit to destroy adversary lines, as no profit could result from such methods iu auy line of road. I sec no reason why the people, the shipper, and othur patrons of railroads should be deprived of the benefits of honorable competition in railroad freights by pooling combina'ious. One of the blessings of every trade is comnetition. Anything done to ueventcompetition establishes monopoly, and with it comes the cast iror grip upon the earnings or houest industry.— Pooling is a combination of railroad corporations to equally get the most from the farmer, the mechanic, the laborer It is an agreement not to iujuie the chances of or.e another to get unjust money from all oih«v people. Why talk here persuasively and softly of this wrong? Are you afraid these railroad companies will take levenge upon you for combatting their wrongs upon the public? Are you afraid of these corporations?— They are in the bands of the peoile of this country, and their wrongs ought to be remedied by law just the same as other wrongs are remedied. Talk to m» about turning on ligl t to wipe out rascality and wroug! Why, siwee tbo Christian eia light has been turned on every phase of wrong known to human aunale, and is it wiped out by the extra light? Not at all. You may turn light on murder, rapine and arson until the whole world knaws how it is doue, and they will not abate one jot or tittle. What does the evil spirit care for the light of exposure? That is no punishment and no preventive at all. Positive law, with penalties, is the only remedy.

It is urged in this discussion that it is right to charge more for a sdort haul of ireight on same line of road than for a long haul Well, that is elasticity indeed. Is it right, is it fair, is it honest to charge the same amount for hauiiug freight tor fifty miles as for three, hundred railed? T e haul of fift miles Is only one-s xth oi the cost of steam, wear and teur, aud time for the 300 miles. Why do they do this? Oh, they pay there is river or lake competition in the long haul and uone in the shoit haul. Ah! isthnt it?— Then wheie there is competition they must come down to whai ? Destruetiverates? Not at all. .What then?— Down to what the carriage of goods or produce can be done for. They say that it is a loss to them. Who knows? Where is the proof? I want no bald assertions. It is known tnat railroads have de stroyed good liver traffic and canal traffic. What riestreyed the Wabash and Erie Canal? ,Ti«e railroads. the water traffic could uof be done as cheaply as it could be done on the railroads. Greater s. eed and convenience of handling freight is on the side of the railroads. Take the state uient as true that long hauls must be made at less figures than short ones, o ill is it right? If competfiioo makes the long haul unprofivu le, which is never true, is it righ to double up the rate on the shou haul where there is uo competition? Is it right to overload the people and sh'ppers of intermediate points on the loaa with hign charges to make up the loss on long hauls of which olhor people and other shippers get the benefit? Is that the beneficent system of railroading? Carry out tho parallel, and, if necessary, the long haul must be made for nominal rates; but we will make the people in the back towns smart for it. They have no competing r< ads and we will just make them sweat under the doubledup rates in order that we mav mane big profits in railroading, though we will haul thrdugh freight for nominal rates. Do you call this system beneficent? Do you call it right? Ido not. It is a wrong that the people will not much longer endure. It is contended that every time a railroad runs through a hill, over a mountain, or across a stream, that the i local shippers mnst pay rates in pro- | portion to the extra cost of the road by reason of Jthese contingencies, while the through shipper shall go free or charge tor these causes' — Well, that is real elasticity indeed. That is called masterly. It certainly is ridiculons, to say the least of it.— Does not tne through shipper get the benefit of the whole road, with all the hills it cuts, with all the mountains it tunnels, and wUh all the streams it crosses? Is he not benefited when he ships over the entire road the same as the shipper over part of it? Certainly he is. Then why charge him half whrt you charge the leoal shipper? The answer cnly is be cause it can be dtue with© t regard

to justice, riget or reason. It is a matter of pure force and not of right. It is tne o'd saying that might makes right. I have no prejudice against railroads or their legitimate business. I am for them: but I say to them do ri ht wi h ail the people and there will b* no complaint [Applause-] The cheapest Teas in town at H M. Purcupile’s Prices as follows: 25c. 30c. 40c. 50e. 60e. per lb.