and from Boston, for example, upon some standardized basis which may not be fairly adjusted to local needs.

At the time of his order increasing rates, the Director-General asked all State commissions for advice "in perfecting the rates thus initiated" and in making "the inevitable readjustments needed to accomplish the largest measure of relative justice." When the new rates were introduced, it soon became apparent that they were unjust in important respects to New England, and upon the invitation of this Commission hearings were held in Boston by representatives of the commissions of the six New England states, at which shippers were given an opportunity to present complaints. These hearings resulted in the submission of a Memorial to the Director-General, signed by members of all these commissions, stating concisely the grounds for complaint and the relief asked for. This Memorial is printed in full in the appendix to this report. It was followed up by correspondence and conference with the Washington authorities and resulted in the abandonment of the attempt to do away with the so-called "differential rates" to the West via the Canadian lines, which have been in existence for more than forty years and are of so much importance to our industries.

Less progress has been made in the case of complaints over coal rates and class freight rates, but we have reason to believe that the need for adjustment is recognized, and that there is reasonable prospect that relief will eventually be given. The local class rates in New England are now. on a substantially higher basis, in general, than the corresponding rates in the adjoining territory west of the Hudson river, and discriminate unfairly against our industries. Disproportionate increases have also been made in the rates on bituminous coal moving allrail and by rail and water into New England, notwithstanding the peculiar importance of such rates to this part of the country. This situation illustrates, we believe, the value of having some official State body equipped to deal with questions relating, not only to local, but to interstate rates and service, even if it possesses no direct jurisdiction over such matters. In the past this fact has not been recognized in New England to the extent that it has in many other sections, especially in the Middle West and the Far West. The prosperity of Massachusetts is

closely interwoven with its transportation facilities, and, while our commercial organizations can be counted upon to guard their interests in proceedings before the Federal authorities, the commonwealth has a still broader interest of its own which ought to be adequately represented and protected. It is the hope of the Commission that it may be able to continue the work along these lines which it has undertaken during the past year, and, if the need develops as we believe it will, we shall feel free to ask the General Court at its next session for an increased appropriation for our Rate and Tariff Department. At present it consists of one man and a stenographer and is handicapped, both as to time and facilities, in the research and investigation which rate questions often require.

Service.

During the year the Commission, at the request of the United States Railroad Administration, submitted a report in regard to the physical condition of the railroad properties within the state and the passenger and freight service afforded. This. is given in full in the appendix to this report. Some considerable progress has been made by the New Haven and Boston and Maine roads in improving track and terminal facilities, but the Commission found that, owing to the difficulty in securing labor, ordinary maintenance work had in certain cases been much delayed. Mild weather in November and December, however, made it possible to recover some of this lost ground.

Passenger service has been greatly curtailed since the beginning of the war for the purpose of conserving fuel and facilitating the movement of troops and munitions. Now that the war is over, the question must receive renewed consideration. It is beginning to be apparent that the railroads in this part of the country will seek from motives of economy to retain the schedules which were introduced for the sake of "winning the war", and that they will claim that the former service was unnecessarily frequent and the present service adequate. The change which has taken place may be indicated by the fact that in the winter of 1910 there were 636 passenger trains entering and leaving the North station in Boston per day, while the number at the present time is 368. Of course it has been possible to accommodate traffic only by running longer trains and using

heavier engines. The trains are now so long that they have outgrown station platforms, in many cases, and also terminal facilities in Boston, and the liability to delay has been materially increased. The smaller communities outside the Metropolitan district are now receiving service which is woefully meager, and the cities have much less express service than used to exist. The situation has been aggravated of late by the fact that the raising of street railway fares has thrown much additional traffic upon the steam railroad lines. It undoubtedly calls for thorough consideration at an early date.

Freight service, on the whole, has improved during the past year. At all events, there is less congestion upon the lines at present than for some years past. This is in part due to the slackening of traffic since the war ended. In this connection, aside from general conditions, there seems reason to believe that the greatly increased minimum charges for handling freight have diverted much short-haul traffic to motor trucks. On this point see the report of the chief of our Rate and Tariff Department which is submitted with this report.

During the year the Commission has made no very definite progress in the investigation of terminal conditions in Boston, provided for by chapter 149 of the Resolves of Terminal 1916. This has been due to the uncertainty caused Conditions. by the war and to the fact that, under Federal control of railroads, methods of operation have changed. The total amount of freight handled in Boston by all roads, both house and yard, was 14.5 per cent less in November, 1918, than in the corresponding month of the previous year. In the case of house freight the decrease has been more than 25 per cent.

As above indicated, the decrease in the general volume of traffic has had much to do with this, but other factors enter in. One is the adoption of the so-called "sailing day" plan, under which less-than-carload freight is shipped from the important distributing centers to the smaller stations in New England only on certain designated days of the week. Another is the policy of moving less freight through Boston. Formerly it was the practice to ship into Boston from outlying points much freight destined to the West, in order that it might be consolidated with the large tonnage shipped from here, thus increasing the

number of through cars to distant western points and making it possible to expedite service. At the present time, the favored plan is to move such freight through outlying points like Worcester, rather than through Boston, holding tonnage at these points long enough to accumulate sufficient bulk for through car service, independent of the Boston shipments.

Whether or not these new practices will in the long run prove satisfactory remains to be seen. An extension of the "sailing day" plan is now proposed which is creating some alarm among shippers, and it may prove that the new method of handling western shipments will result in objectionable delays. In the meantime, however, congestion at the Boston terminals has undoubtedly been reduced very materially.

In the past, complaint has frequently been made of delay in transferring carload freight between the terminals of the Boston and Maine on the north side of the city and those of the New Haven road at South Boston, via the Union Freight railroad operating along the water front over the public streets. Early in the year, when the tonnage in South Boston was much heavier than it is now, this Union Freight railroad was unable to meet the demand, so that it became necessary to divert the surplus transfer business over the roundabout route via the Grand Junction line of the Boston and Albany, through Allston, Cambridge and Somerville. The attention of the Washington authorities was called by the Commission, as no doubt it was by others, to the possibility of improving this situation by the construction of 900 feet of track over Northern Avenue bridge, thus shortening the Union Freight railroad route by nearly 22,000 feet, and not only reducing the distance between terminals 70 per cent, but avoiding the necessity of handling the transfer business through the passenger terminal yard at the South station. The tracks on the bridge have since been laid, but the opening of this new route has been delayed by necessary repairs to the bridge itself, although it may be expected in the near future.

Another important question relative to the Union Freight railroad is whether this line, which is owned by a separate corporation but is entirely controlled by the New Haven company, can properly levy a separate switching charge, as has always been the practice, or should be regarded as a part of the New

Haven terminal system in Boston, upon which it ought fairly to make free deliveries. This question is now being considered by the Commission, although the amount of intrastate business handled is so small that the decision will probably rest with the Washington authorities.

Legislation.

In 1916, and again in 1917, the Commission recommended legislation amending and clarifying the general railroad laws of the commonwealth, so that they might in future more effectively bar the way to such transactions, relative to the securities of other companies, as the New Haven company has been guilty of in the past. In 1917, the statute so recommended was passed by the House of Representatives, and later by the Senate in amended form. Inability to agree upon the exact wording, however, unfortunately resulted in no legislation at all. Last year the Commission did not renew this recommendation, owing to the fact that all railroads were under Federal control, realizing that so long as this status continued any question as to the form and substance of State statutes was of comparatively little consequence. At the present time, however, it seems possible that the roads may return to private management in the not distant future. Under these circumstances it seems well to urge this legislation again, and a draft of a bill embodying it is herewith submitted.

It has been brought to our attention that there is no provision of law in Massachusetts authorizing a railroad to take, by eminent domain, land for the construction of tracks to reach nearby industrial plants. The development of an established industry may be hindered by its inability to get a railroad connection over land of no great value for any other purpose but which is owned or controlled by competitors or other adverse interests, sometimes for the express purpose of preventing such connection. The encouragement of industrial development is manifestly in the public interest, and warrants the extension of the existing powers of railroad corporations relative to land takings so as to include the right, subject to the approval of the Commission, to take land for locations of tracks extending to manufacturing or other industries, and we recommend the passage of legislation to accomplish this purpose, a draft being submitted herewith. There are precedents in other states for such legislation.