sive buildings since the roads have been completed, and have been adding from time to time.

Mr. NORWOOD. Do their tabulated statements show the items that make this $42,000 a mile ?

пр

Mr. COOK. Perhaps it would be well for Mr. Pierson to read to the committee a statment in relation to that.

Mr. PIERSON. They give no items that make up that $42,000. They say, "presume the road costs thus and so."

Mr. Cook. Hence we are to take their conclusions without any details furnished by them.

Mr. DAVIS. It is the details I want to get at.

Mr. Cook. Well, sir, we are very anxious to get at the same thing. Mr. DAVIS. Did I understand you have not been able to get at them? Mr. Cook. That is a point that the railroad companies in this State did not desire either this committee or this board to have definite information about.

The CHAIRMAN. What are the chief causes of dissatisfaction on the part of the people with the present railroad management?

Mr. Cook. The chief causes of dissatisfaction may be all embraced, perhaps, in two classes: one is exorbitant rates, or what we term extortionate rates, and unjust discrimination. The first, of course, embraces excessive charges, that the railroad companies have been charging more than they were fairly entitled to for the service performed, and I think, as a general rule, the history of railroads in this State shows this fact: that as the State has been developed and the business of the roads increased, charges for freight have been increased. That is somewhat reversing the general order of business.

In forming these schedules, I will say, right here, that nearly every railroad man who has been questioned by this board as to the basis upon which they make up their schedules of rates, told us very frankly that they have no basis except to make a schedule to suit their tradethat where they find a place where some money can be made, they make it; and the rule has been at points of competition to endeavor to secure by a reduction of rates a proportion of the transportation business from those points, and to make up the deficiency between those points. That, of course, has excited a good deal of feeling in this State, it being looked upon as unjust discrimination. For instance, here is a competing point. Their published rates would be thus and so, but they have paid no regard to that; and, in fact, the published tariffs of the railroads of the State do not represent fairly, or anything like it, the manner in which their business has been conducted. A distinguished railroad man in the State remarked a short time ago that when he came to look at their schedule and then at their private contracts, and how they had been doing their business, he discovered that hardly anything had been done at their published rates.

Mr. NORWOOD. Do they under-cut?

Mr. Cook. Yes, sir, at these competing points they do; and what the people have complained of is this, that while perhaps the rates from competing points, where various railroads center and terminate in Chicago from the various parts of the State, some running off East, two or three lines starting from a given point and diverging as they pass through the State, and finally reach the same terminus East, there has been pretty sharp competition at some points, and as a general thing they have run the rates down to something like a pretty fair rate, although the leading railroad men in the State, I may say, stated before a committee of the legislature, last winter, that they never made even

special contracts that were not remunerative. But from these points you go ten, fifteen, twenty, and perhaps fifty miles, and from other points, perhaps, ranging from twenty-five or a hundred miles, starting from these competing points, freight has been charged more for transporting it a hundred miles less, or fifty miles less, as the case may be. In other words, just as soon as they would get beyond the reach of these competing points, the tariffs have been graded up to about what they would bear, and that is the kind of discrimination of which the people complainin the State. The law of May last was designed to remedy that, and based, or supposed to be based, at least, upon the common law, that a greater amount should not be charged for a less service, or for transporting freight over a less than over a greater distance of road. While the law does not, perhaps, exactly pro-rate, yet they say it must be something less, the distance being less, although the law admits the discrimination on account of quantity, &c. And that is the basis upon which our schedule is made up.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you remember about the average charge per ton per mile of the roads of this State?

Mr. PIERSON. Some of them do not give it at all. Some of them give it in estimated gross quantities; and when they do give it, it runs from a cent and a quarter to a cent and a half.

Mr. COOK. To go back a little at this point, it may be proper to say that in the first place the railroad companies decline to make any report. This has only been in operation some two years, and finally, when they commenced making reports, they were, many of them, so indefinite and unsatisfactory, that we could not possibly arrive at any definite conclusions in reference to the general average of the cost per ton per mile through the State. We have added several new questions this year in our blanks sent out to the various companies, and some of them, in fact most of them, thus far, which have been coming in, have been very satisfactory, and they are gradually, I think, growing into a more full and perfect report of the condition of the company.

Mr. DAVIS. What is your own idea of their average per ton per mile? You haven't it, I understand you, officially, but you have some idea of it yourself, I suppose.

Mr. Cook. We have done some figuring on that point. Of course there is a difference in transporting various kinds of freight.

The CHAIRMAN. We mean fourth-class-cereals.

Mr. Cook. It will average, we think, from seven mills to a cent per ton per mile, and perhaps a fraction over that.

The CHAIRMAN. The actual cost, do you mean-the money paid out by them?

Mr. Cook. Yes, sir.

Mr. DAVIS. By the companies?

Mr. Cook. Yes, sir; that includes everything; the use of their road, &c.

The CHAIRMAN. The cost of running the train and keeping the road and rolling-stock in repair?

Mr. COOK. Yes, sir; everything necessary to perform the service. Mr. DAVIS. What is the average charge, in your opinion, through the State?

Mr. Cook. I do not know that I am prepared to answer that question exactly. To Mr. Pierson.] Have you ever made an estimate of that? Mr. PIERSON. Not taking the whole of the roads into consideration. Their rates vary so much that it is very difficult to tell.

Mr. COOK. We shall undoubtedly arrive at some definite conclusion

T

upon that point in our report, but as I stated to the chairman of the committee yesterday, in private, our time has been pretty much entirely absorbed upon these schedules, and we have made a good many minutes, which we have left to be further considered.

Mr. NORWOOD. Will that report be made between this and December?

Mr. COOK. Yes, sir. Our report is due on the 1st of September to the governor, but it will have to be published after that.

Mr. DAVIS. You will probably send a copy to the chairman of our committee?

Mr. COOK. We would be very happy to. We hope also to receive something from the committee.

Before I pass on further in reference to this matter, I desire to say, that the people have universally complained on account of the excessive rates for short distances. I think no man can come to any conclusion but this, that their rates for short distances, from one to twenty, forty, sixty, or a hundred miles, have been excessive always. If you have time to compare our schedule with theirs, you will discover that the great difference between them and us is, for these shorter distances. In some cases, even, we overreach them a little, but in making their schedules they have not only done that, but, for instance, after transporting freight a hundred miles, they will reduce largely for the next hundred miles, and for the third hundred miles possibly increase largely. Now, we think there can be no reason for that, and railroad men have generally told us, that, after they have transported freight for one hundred miles there is but little difference in the cost of transporting it another hundred miles. In other words, at the end of each hundred miles the train has to be examined, and a new engine fired up and brought out, and for every other hundred miles it is about a duplicate of that transaction. There is, however, one charge which I think should be a permanent charge, and they have recognized that principle; that is, a fair, advantageous remuneration for the time occupied by a car in loading and unloading. That would be the same whether the freight was transported five miles or five hundred miles. The time of detention would be the same, and hence they would be, of course, entitled to a fair and reasonable charge for that on the start, which would necessarily make the rates for short distances higher per mile than for long distances, after you had reached a point where, as railroad men say, the increased expense could not be very much different from any previous hundred miles. The CHAIRMAN. Did you encounter any difficulty on account of the interstate commerce in fixing your rates? I mean commerce passing from another State into, or through, yours.

Mr. COOK. Well, sir, we have had a good many questions asked about that. What we intended to do in reference to that matter was early asked by some of the important companies in the State, and we embod ied our opinions in a circular which was issued, and which, very likely, you saw. I do not know that we can say anything further upon that point than what is set forth in our circular. That is the view we have taken. The railroad companies, of course, have been free, and exercise that freedom to ask all the intricate questions connected with the matter, and submitted them, while the more plain questions of the law have been left unattended to.

The CHAIRMAN. What I meant was, have you encountered any practical difficulty in fixing it growing out of these constitutional questions? Mr. COOK. I do not consider it very technical, sir. We come to the conclusion which we think based it upon the common law. It was pre

sented to the board as a question. Of course we did not claim the right to make a schedule from Chicago to New York City, or from Springfield to New York City, or from the west line of the State to any given point in another State, or from any point outside of the State to a point within the State. We merely claimed the right to say that citizens of other States should enjoy the same privileges within our own State that our own citizens enjoy, but we did not think that they should have any additional privileges in this State over our own citizens, and hence the commission said, in reference to that, that freight shipped from a point without the State to a point within the State should not be at less rates than our own people were charged, or freight was charged from, for instance, the west line of the State to some point of delivery within the State, giving the citizens outside of the State the same protection against extortion within the State that we claim for our own citizens.

And so in reference to freight being shipped from a point within the State to a point without the State. We say that it should not be done for less; for instance, freight should not be shipped from Chicago to Indianapolis at less rates than our own citizens were charged from Chicago to the east line of the State. And so in reference to freight passing through the State from Iowa, for instance, on the west, to some point east of the State. We say that the charges should not be less than from the west to the east line of the State. In fact, the principle is reached in this clause of the circular; also the charges from a point west of the State to a point east of the State must not be the same as or less than the charges over the same road from the west line to the east line of the State. The principle is that the charges for any distance within this State must not be the same or greater than the charges for a greater distance. That, as we understand, is an acknowledged common-law principle, and that is all we have said in regard to that matter. We have had no test cases, as yet, in the courts, and have not had time for them.

Mr. DAVIS. Is your board created by the constitution, or by an act of your legislature?

Mr. Cook. It was created by an act.

Mr. DAVIS. What authority does that give you to fix rates for the railroads? Have you positive authority upon that subject?

Mr. Cook. Yes, sir. I will read the eighth section of the act: "The railroad and warehouse commissioners are hereby directed to make for each of the railroad corporations doing business in this State, as soon as practicable, a schedule of reasonable maximum rates of charges.for the transportation of passengers and freight and cars on each of said railroads, and said schedule shall, in all suits brought against any such railroad corporation wherein is in any way involved the charges of any such railroad corporation for the transportation of any passenger, or freight, or cars, or unjust discrimination in relation thereto, be deemed and taken in all courts in this State as prima-facie evidence that the rates therein fixed are reasonable maximum rates of charges for the transportation of passengers and freight and cars upon the railroads for which said schedules may have been respectively prepared." That is the authority under which the board prepared these schedules.

There is also a provision in the act, "Provided, That the schedules thus prepared shall be taken as prima facie evidence, as herein provided, until schedules shall have been prepared and published as aforesaid for all the railroad companies now organized under the laws of this State, and until the fifteenth day of January, eighteen hundred and seventy

four, or until ten days after the meeting of the next session of this general assembly: provided, a session of the general assembly shall be held previous to the fifteenth day of January aforesaid." The constitution of this State requires the passage of a law embracing those principles.

Mr. DAVIS. Do the railroads as a rule recognize your tariff's which you have made, and charge by it, or do they resist it?

Mr. COOK. We have no official information of that fact. The railroad companies, as a matter of course, resist any law looking to controlling them in that direction. Many of them, however, state that they are going to abide by the law after the first of July; but their construction of the law is evidently to render it odious, without any intention whatever, I have no hesitation in saying, of complying with that law; the object being, as I say, to render the law odious and secure its repeal; and in fact to abrogate every law, leaving them as they always have been heretofore.

Mr. DAVIS. Have there been any suits adjudicated yet, as to the right of the legislature to regulate the tolls of the railroad?

Mr. COOK. There has been one suit determined by the supreme court of this State.

Mr. NORWOOD. That is the case that has gone to the United States Supreme Court?

Mr. COOK. No, sir; none to the United States Supreme Court.
Mr. NORWOOD. Has not that case gone up?

Mr. PIERSON. No, sir; it went to the supreme court of our own State, which set the law aside-I mean the old law, which the last legislature repealed. No case has ever gone to the United States Supreme Court. Mr. NORWOOD. Has any case ever gone through either of your courts under the present act?

Mr. PIERSON. No, sir. We do not wish to be understood that the legislature has given us the right to fix rates for these companies. That is not in the law, if you understand it so. That is not what we understand. We do not fix rates, but fix a schedule which shall be taken in courts as prima-facie evidence of a reasonable rate.

Mr. Cook. That law and those rates are maximum rates. They are not minimum rates. They leave the company to discriminate as they please under the law, except that the discrimination is not an unjust one, and what we would consider an unjust discrimination under the law would be to carry from a given point to a given point an equal quantity of freight of the same class in the same direction, and one rate for one individual and for another individual another rate. In other words, if the railroad company should decide to carry freight to Chicago for one individual a hundred miles at a given rate below ours, every other individual would be entitled to the same privilege under the law for a like quantity and quality of freight in the same direction for the same distance.

The CHAIRMAN. Just at that point I wish to ask you whether, after making these comparisons of rates, and in fixing upon your maximum, you have endeavored to fix the maximum as low as you thought would be just to the roads and to the community. That is, have you sought to fix as low a maximum as you thought the road could make reasonable profits under?

Mr. Cook. Yes, sir. We understand that there is reasonable room for competition under our schedules. We fixed our rates not so low as we believed freight could be carried for, but we fixed what we deemed, under the circumstances and present lights we have before us, and the course we have adopted to arrive at our conclusions as to what we be