Newspaper Page Text
6
(Communicated.)
‘PLEADING THE BABY ACT,’
—OR-
The Question of ‘Differentials.’
Editor Kennesaw Gazette: I was
very much struck with the appropri
ateness of your article in the last num
ber of the Gazette, under the title of
“Pleading the Baby Act,” and inas
much as this evidently refers to the
claim of the East Tennessee, Virginia
& Georgia Railway Co. that the West
ern & Atlantic Railroad Co., and the
other owners of the Union Passenger
Depot at Atlanta, should allow it a
differential, because the East Tennes
see, Virginia & Georgia Railway trains
are not allowed to enter the Union
Depot at Atlanta, it strikes me that a
•few 7 thoughts might properly be laid
before your readers in this connection,
and with your permission, I will do
this in the present and probably your
next issue.
The East Tennessee, Virginia &
Georgia Railway Co., as I understand
it, has endeavored to make a great
point with the public and with the
railroad world in particular, that it is
entitled to a differential, or, in other
words, to charge a less rate from At
lanta to various points, than the West
ern & Atlantic, the Central and other
roads whose trains enter the Union
Depot at Atlanta.
The East Tennessee, Virginia &
Georgia Railway Co. frankly admits
that it is “at a disadvantage” in At
lanta by reason of the fact that its
trains do not enter the Union Depot.
Let us look a little into the history
of matters, and see what pretense for
moral right they have for their claim
for a differential. They certainly have
no legal right.
The State of Georgia several years
ago by act of its Legislature gave the
East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia
Railroad Co. permission to build a
line from Rome, Ga., to Macon, Ga.,
and thereby connect the two portions
of its system which are in the State of
Georgia.
The granting of this charter to the
E. T., V. & G. R. R. Co. to build a
railroad in direct competition to the
State’s own railroad, which was one of
the most magnificent pieces of proper
ty in the South, was for the express
purpose of securing for the people of
Georgia competition. Promise was
made by the E. T., V. & G. R. R.
Co., seeking the charter, that their
road should be run in such a manner
as to not break down the State’s own
property.
The charter, as above said, was
granted. The road was built from
Rome to Macon, and on the 16th day
of September, 1882, the people were
notified that the E. T., V. G. R. R.
Co. had a line open from Chattanooga
to Brunswick, and asking the patron
age of the public.
Co-ordinately with this notification
to the public, notice was sent to all the
railroads south of Atlanta stating that
the E. T., V. & G. R. R. wished all
business for its stations or points reach
ed via it north of Atlanta to be deliv
ered to it at Atlanta and “not to the
Western & Atlantic Railroad.” —Mark
those words.
Notice was also sent to the roads
north of Chattanooga stating that the
E. T., V. &G. R. K. Co. desired all
business for points on its line south of
Atlanta delivered to it at Chattanooga,
and “not to the Western & Atlantic
Railroad.”
At about the same time, the E. T.,
V. &G. R. R, Co. withdrew from
sale forms of tickets which they had
been using for years, whereby a pas
senger in Knoxville, for instance, could
buy a ticket reading over the E. T.,
V. & G. R. R. to Dalton and over
the W. & A. R. R. from Dalton to
Atlanta. They thereby excluded from
the people of Knoxville and other
points on their line the privilege of
traveling over the W. & A. R. R. in
competition to their own line, even
though the passenger might ever so
much desire it.
The only means for the accomplish
ment of his wish which was left to the
passenger was to buy a local ticket to
Dalton and then buy a ticket reading
over the W. & A. R. R. and take the
trouble also to have his baggage re
checked at Dalton.
The same state of affairs was brought
about at all stations in Georgia.
This was competition with a ven
geance, was’nt it ? This was carrying
out its promises and pledges t<> the
Legislature and to the people ot Geor
gia. This was another most practical
exhibition of the fact that however
beautiful the tiger’s skin may have
been yet there was a claw hidden un
der it which would rend as soon as the
tiger obtained an opportunity for do
ing so.
The same course was adopted by the
E. T., V. & G. R. R. Co. against
the Central Railroad; and having
thus hedged in their own posessions
and shut and barred the gates of them
against the Western & Atlantic Rail
road —having, in other words, built as
it were a Chinese wall around every
thing which it possessed so as to pre
vent the passengers or freight which
were in its power from going over the
Western & Atlantic Railroad, it then
put on a look and raised a cry of self
assumed injured innocence against the
Western A Atlantic, and the other
lines owning the Union Depot at At
lanta, who refused to surrender to
them equal enjoyment of their termin
al facilities in the Union Depot.
The Western & Atlantic Railroad
Co., by the way, for over a year did
allow the E. T., V. A G. R. R. Co.
the use of its freight terminals in At
lanta on payment of 82.00 per car,
switch charge; but finding that the
rates were being cut, and that its
own terminals were being used for the
purpose of breaking down its business,
it withdrew this privilege from the E.
T., V. & G. R. R. Co.
The act which brought this privilege
directly to a termination by the West
ern A Atlantic, was the practical re
fusal of the E. T., V. A G. R. R.
Co. to reciprocate this courtesy and
divide the use of its terminals with the
Western & Atlantic. The Atlanta
water works needed 1,000 tons of coal.
The nearest point of delivery was on
the line of the E. T., V. & G. R. R.,
just outside the city of Atlanta. The
W. A A. asked the E. T., V. & G.
what would be their switch charge out
to that point if the W. A A. brought
the coal to Atlanta. The reply was:
“Fifty cents per ton.” The W. A A.
answered: “But we charge you only
10 cents per ton for the use of our ter
minals, and we don’t think this is ex
actly fair.” The E. T., V. A G. re
plied that 50 cents Was their rate and
that was the best they would do.
The W. A A. then passed an order
excluding the E. T., V. A G. from
the use of a portion of the W. A A.
side-tracks in Atlanta. Subsequently
the order was made absolute as to ail
of their side-tracks.
The E. T., V. A G. then had the
W. A A. summoned before the Rail
road Commission of Georgia and de
manded that the latter company be
compelled to open the use of their ter
minals to the E. T., V. A G.
THE KENNESAW GAZETTE.
After hearing very full argument on
both sides, the Railroad Commission
decided in effect that the W. A A.
owned its terminals and that the E. T.,
V. A G. had as much right to demand
the use of the W. & A. Railroad from
Chattanooga to Atlanta as it had to de
mand the use of its terminal facilities
in Atlanta.
The demand of the E. T., V. A G.
R. R. Co., in this case, would find its
parallel if a merchant in a poor build
ing in the outskirts of Atlanta should
demand of one who owned a magnifi
cent building in the heart of the city
the use of a portion of it on the pay
ment of rent. Being refused he would
say: “I have not the means; or 1
have not the inclination to purchase
an expensive building in this locality ;
but it is very illiberal and narrow
minded in you to shut me out in this
manner and prevent the people from
having the benefits of competition.”
“That’s very pretty talk,” the other
would reply, “but if you wish to give
the public the benefit of fair competi
tion, do like I did —buy you a lot right
near here and build thereon as fine
and well located a house as mine.”
“Oh, no, that is a very unreasona
ble requirement on your part,” the E.
T., V. A G. prototype would reply,
“you ought to be made to divide the
use of yours with me.”
Os course, there was earnest remon
strance against this action of the W.
A A. There was more than that.
There were threats of retaliation, and
notice was given that if the W A A.
R. R. Co. did not recede from its po
sition the E. T., V. A G. R. R. Co.
would establish free delivery of freights
in Atlanta.
Os course, if the Western A Atlan
tic had receded, the E. T., V. A G.
would not have established free delivery in
Atlanta. Therefore, the great credit
which that company claims for taking
this step is not entitled to respectful
consideration. It was forced to do so
by the action of the Western A Atlan
tic, which considered that it was wil
ling to make free delivery of such
freights as it could not deliver on its
own side-tracks and other terminals in
Atlanta if the E. T., V. A G. would
do likewise. The people of Atlanta,
therefore, are indebted to the Western
A Atlantic Railroad Co. for the free
delivery of freights. Bullying never
was, by the way, a successful game to
attempt to play upon the Western A
Atlantic.
The next step of the E. T., V. A
G. R. R. Co. was to give notice to its
connections northward and southward
that they could not sell tickets read
ing over the E. T., V. A G. R. R. to
junction with the W. A A., thence
over the W. A A.
Another fine exemplification of the
sincerity of their pledge that the peo
ple should have competition!
Your readers are, most of them,
aware of the general circumstances of
the passenger war of rates between the
two companies last fall; hence, I will
not take your space in more than mak
ing this reference to that.
Now, let us come immediately to
the consideration of the question as to
the validity of the E. T., V. A G. Ry.
Co’s, claim for a differential on ac
count of not being in the Union Depot
in Atlanta.
Its claim for differential is made,
bear in mind, after it has shown to the
world that it has excluded the West
ern A Atlantic Railroad from every
thing like equality on business origi
nating on its own lines. It advertises
to the world its self-styled advantages,
which it claims are “unrivalled and
unapproachable,” and with the same
mouth that blows this tremendous bu
gle blast to the traveling public, it
querulously complains that it has not
equal advantages with the Western A' At
lantic Railroad at Atlanta, and, there
fore, it must be allowed a differential
rate in order to compensate for its disa
bilities.
Well, it is a poor rule that don’t
work both ways, and the American
people are characteristic for their give
and-take ideas, and for their belief
that fair play should always exist.
The E. T., V. A G. Ry., if it pres
ses its claim for a differential, should
be willing to “eat soup out of its own
spoon,” in other words, if it “labors
under a disability” as compared with
the W. A A. R. R., at Atlanta, then
it should be willing to concede a differ
ential to the IE A* A. R. R. at points
where the lattei is at a disadvantage, or
labors under “a disability,'’ and not only
should this be the case as considered
in its dealings with the W. A A., but
it should also be the case as considered
in its dealings with all of its other com
petitors; and if the E. T., V. A G.
Ry. must be allowed a differential
wherever it is at a disadvantage, then
the Louisville A Nashville Railroad
Co. must enjoy the same privilege; so
must the Central Railroad of Georgia,
and so must every other railroad in
this territory.
The E. T., V. A G. Ry. Co. claims
that the question of Atlanta rates should
be submitted to arbitration, and that,
as arbitration is the fairest way to set
tle disputed questions, this method
should be adopted to determine how
much differential, if any, should be al
lowed it at Atlanta to compensate for
its confessed disabilities.
The W. A A. R. R. Co. claims, and
very justly so, that the arbitration of
Atlanta rates is not in order until ar
bitration is had upon the main question
of allowing differentials where lines are at
a disadvantage with one another respect
ively —in other words, it will strike
any reasonable man that it would be
improper for arbitration to be held on
the Atlanta rates and a differential, for
instance, be allowed the E. T., V. A
G. Ry. Co. to compensate for its dis
advantages as contrasted with the W.
A A., and that the W. A A. should
then wait for arbitration to be held at
some subsequent time to equalize the
E. T., V., A G.’s advantages over it
at other points.
It is frankly conceded by the W. A
A. people that there are other points
where their line is at a disadvantage
as compared with the E. T., V. A G.;
but I will only here remark that at
such points it has in a manly manner
worked hard and endeavored on the
merits of its line to secure business,
instead of crying like a baby, or threat
ening like a spoiled child to ruin every
thing around it if it was not humored
in its whim.
The claim for differentials, as is clear
ly indicated, is one to equalize disad
vantages.
Now, there are several kinds of dis
advantages. One is the disadvantage
in terminal facilities; another is that
caused by the fact that one line is ap
preciably longer than another; again,
we may mention the disadvantage
which a newly built road labors under
as compared with one which has been
constructed for 40 years or more, and
whose road-bed and iron bridges make
it safer for passengers to travel over
than the new road. Another disad
vantage, probably, would exist when
one road had finer engines, finer cars,
and more experienced corps of em
ployes than the other. Another dis
advantage would be suffered by one
line which had no through cars be
tween two points where its competitor
did have; and so we might go on ex
tending the list.
The E. T., V. A G. Ry. Co. bases