Mr. LOVERING. Is it not reasonable to suppose that that would be true?

Mr. MEAD. Yes; they would save the cost of the cars and the maintenance, and that is why they can pay them three-quarters of a cent. Mr. LOVERING. Is not that a sufficient reason why they make lower terms and rates with those people?

Mr. MEAD. Yes, sir; but at the same time the rate ought to be made the same. They can pay the car company a rate of three-quarters of a cent a mile; but whatever mileage they do pay them, that will save them building the cars and save them some cost; but the open rate should be the same to all shippers.

Mr. MANN. Is it not a fact that the open freight rate, eliminating any special rate, is the same to the shippers in cars owned by themselves as it is to anyone else, and the only difference is that the railroad pays to the owner of the cars the mileage for the use of the cars, and that is all?

Mr. MEAD. Yes, sir.

Mr. MANN. That is the way the operation is carried on?

Mr. MEAD. Yes, sir; although I know in some cases they pay the icing charges direct to the car company. I think in the peach business they pay the freight to the railroad and the icing charges to the car company, but sometimes the railroad collects both charges.

Mr. COOMBS. In reference to the shipment of California fruit, is there that rebate of which you have spoken which pertains to the shipment of poultry and beef in the West?

Mr. MEAD. I am not familiar with that, because we do not handle any California fruit.

Mr. COOMBS. You do not know about that?

Mr. MEAD. No, sir.

Mr. COOMBS. Do you know what cars they are shipping now-who own those cars?

Mr. MEAD. The C. F. and D., Nelson, the Armour Company, and the Swift Company. I think that the Swift Company has recently acquired the C. F. and D. The papers have stated recently that the Santa Fe road was building a number of thousand refrigerator cars, and that another year they would carry the freight in their own cars and do away with the cars belonging to these private individuals and companies.

I think, Mr. Chairman, that covers the ground that I had in mindthe fact that as public-service corporations these railroads should be subjected to supervision, and that will control where competition will not. We would not think in any one of our cities where we had street railways and electric lighting service of letting another company come in except under proper regulations, and it must be shown in a case of that kind that the public convenience requires another company. We do not want poles duplicated, and streets dug up, and things of that kind unless the other company is needed, because otherwise it will be the two competing companies, and one would buy up the other, and the company would have to pay an increased cost on account of the plant taken over and new securities issued, and it seems to me that should be the attitude of Congress toward the railroads.

I thank you very much, gentlemen.

STATEMENT OF MR. CHARLES ENGLAND.

Mr. ENGLAND. I am here as a representative, with Mr. Daish, chairman of the committee of the National Hay Association, to advocate the present bill, which you are now considering.

The National Hay Association is distinctively a business men's organization. It is more national in scope, perhaps, than any other organization in this country. Its membership amounts to between 750 and 800, residing in all the principal producing States of the Union.

The production of hay, its value, its importance, is very generally overlooked, and I have only to remind you that the production of hay in the United States in 1900 was about 56,000,000 tons, and the value about $450,000,000. Those are figures from the Department of Agriculture. It is of more value than the wheat crop, the oat crop, or the rye crop, and is second only to the corn crop. The crop of corn in 1900, which was a phenomenal crop, was about 58,000,000 tons. The same year there were over 50,000,000 tons of hay produced. We have been discriminated against, and the point which I want to make now is that hay has been discriminated against as in favor of other articles, other commodities; that because of the recent classification, known as No. 20, issued by the classification committee of the railroads, which went into effect on January 21, 1900, hay was changed from sixth to fifth class.

It had been in the sixth class, with the exception of a few months for, I think, ten or twelve years. There had been no complaint as to the fairness of that rate. The railroads had been glad to carry it and glad to receive it. But most arbitrarily and, we think, in a most unfair manner, the notice not being sufficient for any man to adapt his business to changed conditions, that rate was changed. National Hay Association protested, but without effect, and after it had been given six months' trial the association again went before the classification committee and showed this discrimination and its bad effect, and that it was injuring the business, and we were received almost with indifference.

The

Since that time the matter has been taken before the Interstate Commerce Commission, and the case is now pending before them, but we fear that under the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States they will not be able to effect any remedy for us, although we think we have shown them the fairness of our contention.

Mr. Chairman, the question was raised here yesterday, or the day before, as to whether these rates, these discriminations, affected the farmer. I think I can show you in regard to hay that they do. Out of our crop of hay of 56,000,000 tons the States west of the Mississippi River, including Wisconsin, produced about 26,000,000 tons, very nearly one-half of the hay crop. Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota; Iowa leading with a crop of about 5,000,000 tons. Those are figures from the Department of Agriculture. They do not refer to wild grasses or pasturage, and to remind you of that, the great State of Texas is only credited with a hay crop of 480,000 tons, while the small State of Maryland is given a crop of 380,000 tons.

The CHAIRMAN. How much of that hay from the State cf Iowa goes to markets outside of the lines of the State?

Mr. ENGLAND. We have not those figures. Those would be impossible to obtain, as to exactly the disposition of the crop.

The CHAIRMAN. Take the 26,000,000 tons that are produced west of the Mississippi River, including Wisconsin, as you say-what has gone East or gone to those markets of all of that quantity?

Mr. ENGLAND. I think in the last two years not one ton of that hay has come East. When I say East I mean the Eastern seaboard markets. That is what I was coming to. Taking this hay from the sixth class. and putting it in the fifth class increases the freight on hay from $1 to $2.60 a ton, according to the distance of the haul and the location. Prior to that we in Baltimore frequently brought hay from west of the Ohio River. We shipped hay from Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin, and all the Western States. I have been in the hay business for well on to twenty years, and prior to this time we considered Illinois and eastern Iowa our best sources of supply, but in the last two years I have not handled a carload of hay from Illinois, and very little from Indiana, and our sources of supply are Ohio and southern Indiana.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that the result of the increased railroad rates, or is it the result of the higher price of beef cattle which induces the farmer to put all of his hay into his cattle on his farm?

Mr. ENGLAND. Well, I believe that it is the result of these high

rates.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it not true that with cattle at 5 cents and 5 cents a pound on the farm that hay is worth on the farm from $16 to $17 a ton to the farmer.

Mr. ENGLAND. That is a question I could not go into, not knowing anything about that business. But we all know that there has been a great increase in the cattle raising all through the country. At the same time, we know that, taking the prices of hay in the State of Iowa-perhaps not to-day-this has been a peculiar year because of the drought through the South and West, when there has been an increased demand for hay-but had the old rate been maintained we could have brought hay from those States under many conditions. Hay is being exported to-day from our ports to Europe.

There has been a better demand for our hay this year than for many years before. Owing to the war in South Africa the English army has been obliged to carry hay from Liverpool and Belfast and Cardiff to meet the demand, and if we had had the old rates to-day, which, as I say, were $1 to $1.50 less than those of to-day, we could have exported much more hay than we have been doing, and in that way the farmer has not been able to market his hay and get a price for it, and we have been cut out of that business.

Mr. MANN. Has not there been a shortage of hay in Illinois and Iowa during the past two years?

Mr. ENGLAND. I do not know about that exactly, except for the crop of 1901, and the crop that Illinois raised in the year before. The figures of the crop of 1901 were 53,000,000 tons, according to the original estimate. The crop preceding that, on which I am basing my statement, was 56,000,000 tons.

Mr. MANN. How was it three or four or five years ago?

Mr. ENGLAND. Why, it has ranged from 45,000,000 tons up to, I think, about 56,000,000 or 57,000,000 tons. That is going back to a time of ten years ago. The crop of Illinois in 1900 was 2,350,000 tons.

Mr. MANN. How has the price been on hay for the last three or four years?

Mr. ENGLAND. With the ordinary market fluctuations from time to time, it has averaged probably a dollar and a half a ton, in the last two years, higher than it was, taking the average of fifteen years before that. The price has been a little better. It has had to be better at the seaboard to meet this advance in rates.

Mr. MANN. Take the Chicago market. That is not affected by these conditions?

Mr. ENGLAND. I have not those figures definitely. I would not like to express merely my opinion, but we have watched the Chicago market from time to time and we have not had any opportunity in the last two years to buy hay there and bring it here. Heretofore we have been able to do it, but lately we have not.

Mr. MANN. This rate that you speak of is from Chicago and points

east

Mr. ENGLAND. Yes, sir; this rate refers to all points in that territory that I have mentioned.

Mr. MANN. I say the Chicago basic points. In what class is hay in the Western classification?

Mr. ENGLAND. I do not know as to that.

Mr. MANN. You say that hay now is in the fifth class in what is known as the official classification; that is, east of the Mississippi River?

Mr. ENGLAND. Yes, sir.

Mr. MANN. How is it in the Southern classification?

Mr. ENGLAND. We do no business in the South. We do not know about that. This refers to the classification north of the Ohio and Potomac rivers.

But, Mr. Chairman, we have stated that discriminated against in favor of other commodities. The question was raised here about the capacity of the cars having some effect on the question. Now, I have brought with me to-day two freight bills, which will probably better illustrate it than any other matter, one for a car of hay and the other a car of oats, shipped from the same point by the same shipper in Michigan to the same party in Baltimore, coming into Baltimore over the Pennsylvania line, one of the carloads delivered to a local elevator, and the hay delivered to the terminal warehouse, the hay warehouse of the railroad, situated within 250 yards of the elevator. This is under classification No. 20, which we complain of. The car of hay was 21,190 pounds. It paid a rate of 244 cents, and the freight paid was $51.92. The car of oats from the same party, shipped to the same point, contained 33,000 pounds, at a rate of 10 cents, and the freight paid was $34.65.

In other words, the railroad company hauled 33,000 pounds of oats from the same point to the same point for about $17 less than they charged for this very much smaller amount of hay.

Now, I will say that since that time there has been an advance of 3 cents per 100 pounds on grain more than it is on hay. Therefore it does not make my argument quite as strong.

Mr. MANN. What is the date of those bills?

Mr. ENGLAND. Those bills are about two years old.

Mr. MANN. What is the date of them?

Mr. ENGLAND. They were selected because it is but seldom that you

can find two cars shipped from the same parties to the same parties of different commodities.

Mr. MANN. What is the date of the bills?

Mr. ENGLAND. April, 1900.

Mr. MANN. That is after the lake traffic is over?

Mr. ENGLAND. Since that time there has been a change on grain of 3 cents per 100 pounds, making the rate 13 cents per 100 pounds, which would make that cost of transportation about $9 more. The rate on hay remains the same, and to-day this would show up in this way. The present freight rate on grain from Durand to Baltimore is 13 cents; the present rate on hay from Durand to Baltimore is 22 cents. Upon this basis the cost of transportation of 21,190 pounds of hay at 24 cents is $51.92; the cost of transportation of 33,000 pounds of oats at 13 cents is $44.55. So that even to-day the railroad company would haul 22,000 pounds of hay and charge more for it than they would for half as much again of oats, showing that the capacity of hauling of hay does not enter into

Mr. RICHARDSON. Is there not something in the question of the commodity to be handled and the facility and ease with which it can be handled?

Mr. ENGLAND. I do not think that at terminal points it takes any longer to load a carload of hay than it does a carload of oats; that is, at the terminal house; they both go to the public warehouse.

Mr. WANGER. How about the matter of space taken in shipping? Mr. ENGLAND. They take the same space. That is the point that I wish to make.

Mr. RYAN. It is of less weight.

Mr. RICHARDSON. Who is complaining about that?

Mr. ENGLAND. The National Hay Association is complaining that hay has been discriminated against.

Mr. RICHARDSON. Why?

Mr. ENGLAND. By this unjust classification. Hay has been put in the fifth class from the sixth class, whereas it used to be uniformly in the sixth class, and that has prevented business to that extent. The CHAIRMAN. What is the reason given by the carriers? Mr. ENGLAND. They have never given us any real reasons.

The CHAIRMAN. Did they make no argument at all because of this seeming unjust discrimination?

Mr. ENGLAND. I have not heard of any, sir. I have not heard of any arguments they have made. They heard our arguments and simply ignored them.

Thereupon, at 11.45 a. m., the committee adjourned until to-morrow, Saturday, April 12, 1902, at 10.30 o'clock a. m.

SATURDAY, April 12, 1902. The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. William P. Hepburn in the chair.

STATEMENT OF MR. E. P. BACON-Continued.

Mr. BACON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to present in connection with the subject that was discussed the other day, in regard to the powers of the Commission, a statement which appears in the Interstate