solidations of conflicting classifications into one, or a few, of compara tive harmony were shown to have been accomplished within certain fairly well-defined sections of the country.

The principal classifications then prevailing were stated to be the Official, the Western, and the Southern Railway and Steamship Association classifications, existing, respectively, in the sections of country roughly outlined as follows: The first in the territory east of and including Chicago and St. Louis and north of the Ohio River; the second in the territory west, north, and southwest from Chicago and St. Louis; and the third, in the territory south of the Ohio and Potomac and east of the Mississippi. Mention was made in this report of an effort made by a conference of railway representatives to merge the Official and Western classifications into one, a result which, if accomplished, would have been a long stride in the direction of uniformity, but which, unfortunately, failed of being realized. The reasons for the failure were thus given in the report on classification adopted at the conference referred to. The report is here given at length, because it may be presumed to be a presentation from the carriers' standpoint of the difficulties attendant upon the formation of a uniform classification.

The committee, consisting of representatives of the trunk lines of the Central Traffic Association and of the organizations extending westward from Chicago and St. Louis, appointed to prepare for submission a classification which should govern in the interchange of all freight traffic, excepting that destined to and from the Pacific coast, at its last meeting held in New York July 19 and 20, 1888, unanimously

Resolved, That this committee, while recognizing the desirability of a uniform classification, report that after patient and prolonged conferences held for the purpose of formulating such a classification, it is unable at this time to agree upon one which it can recommend for adoption.

Among the reasons which led to the foregoing conclusions may be stated the following:

When the joint conference committee was appointed in September last it was believed the time had come for the adoption of one classification which should govern on all freight traffic interchanged between eastern and western railroads. The disparities which prevailed in the classifications used respectively east and west of the Mississippi River had been brought to the notice of various authorities, State and commercial, and they in turn had drawn the attention thereto of the Interstate Commerce Commission. The last-named body, it was thought, would be obliged to move in the direction of greater uniformity in freight classification, and rather than by waiting invite such action, those who spoke for the railroad companies advised that steps be taken to at least remove the more glaring differences which existed between the classifications of the eastern and western roads. Moreover, the progress of events had pointed plainly in the direction of uniformity. Previous to the adoption of the interstate law there were numerous classifications in effect in the territory served by the trunk lines and their affiliated roads. With a zeal and pertinacity unprecedented, a committee representing the lines just described had, a few weeks before the interstate law became effective, addressed themselves resolutely to the task of consolidating into one the various classifications which long had been recognized between the Mississippi River and the Atlantic seaboard, thus creating one classification adapted to the requirements of the traffic in the most populous

district of the country. Not only were there numerous local clsssifications thus to be taken up, but the rates and the classifications were not the same eastward bound as they were westward bound on the traffic interchanged between the East and the West. Westward bound there were but five regular classes, while eastward bound there were thirteen.

To make the rates applicable in either direction and embrace the numerous commodities within six classes was, therefore, a great undertaking; but, although many were skeptical regarding the outcome, patiently and persistently it was carried to a successful completion. The trunk lines having thus adapted to their local and through freight traffic in either direction one classification, known now as the Official, it was urged that the way had been paved for the march still further toward uniformity. With that view your committee was appointed, and in the hope of achieving ultimate success the work was begun.

Six conferences were held, in addition to the one at which this report was agreed upon, each extending over a period of several days. Soon it became apparent that radical differences existed in the requirements and conditions of the sections east and west of the Mississippi River respectively. The former desired not to increase the difference between the less than car lot and the car-lot rates on the same commodities, and to preserve as nearly as possible the relations they had established between the several classes, while the latter urged that on account of the cost of operating and the comparatively small tonnage in the sparsely settled West, they could not afford to add to the number of less than car-lot classes, nor could they profitably handle and foster their traffic without exercising greater latitude than was proposed in the making of rates and the differences between the same. Hence, they desired that eight classes be adopted, with the understanding that all less than car lots be included in the first four classes, thus limiting the remaining four classes to articles carried in car lots.

Such a proposition, while manifestly in the interest of the western lines, because adapted to their circumstances and essential to their profitable operation, could not consistently be accepted by the trunk lines. For years the latter had operated without any difference in merchandise rates westward between car lots and less; therefore, when they consented to the adoption of six classes and the recognition of numerous car lots, as shown in the official classification, they had gone quite as far as it was believed they could with safety go, in view of the long-established custom prevailing in this respect throughout the territory between the seaboard and the Mississippi River. The result was, at this point, a difference in views between eastern and western members, which could not well be reconciled; and the work subsequently done by the committee, in proposing to rate less than car lot articles below fourth class was in most, if not all, cases affected by a majority vote-the East having eight and the West seven members of the committee.

Notwithstanding this difference, lines leading to the Missouri River were disposed to proceed with the work, and if possible adopt one classification to govern between the Atlantic seaboard and the Missouri River points, Saint Paul, and Minneapolis. Resolutions looking to that end were at one time adopted by western and northwestern lines, but before the suggestions made could be carried out events took another turn.

From causes not necessary now to be enumerated the western roads became involved in a widespread and disastrous rate war, during which those in civil authority intimated they might be obliged to prescribe for the roads schedules approximating the charges which at times had by the carriers been voluntarily made. Accordingly, when the Iowa commissioners promulgated a schedule of rates for the roads in that State which, by the companies interested, was considered ruinously low, the authorities in Nebraska and Minnesota gave notice of their desire to follow the example set. Thus the Western roads were confronted with reductions which in no event could they expect wholly to escape. Through tariffs to Missouri River

points had already been greatly reduced, and local rates in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and Kansas were certain to reach a level not anticipated by the most despondent when the work of your committee was begun. The effect of those reductions upon the revenues of the Western roads was viewed by the managers with alarm, and as they had been informed the adoption of the classification outlined by your committee would involve them in further reductions, they were understood to shrink from assuming an additional loss which they could just as well avoid.

Besides, the question of practicability had not been fully considered when it was proposed to carry a union classification as far as the Missouri River. Lines leading from Chicago and St. Louis own, operate, or control several thousand miles of road west of the Missouri River. If they should attempt to use one classification to and another west of the line just described it would oblige them to divide their systems at that point, inasmuch as through tariffs could not be issued in simple form from Chicago, St. Louis, and points common therewith, as they now are, to the multiplicity of stations west of the Missouri River, unless one classification should govern throughout. Otherwise they would be compelled to print commodity tariffs to the many common points on their own lines and those of their connections west of the Missouri River. This, it was evident, could not readily be done.

Meantime, the position thus taken was confirmed by the action of roads interested in the transcontinental and other traffic. Those lines met early in June, and at once set about formulating freight tariffs, subject to the Western classification. This involved a vast amount of labor, inasmuch as the various articles enumerated had to be carefully scanned, and a considerable number requiring special treatment were placed in commodity lists. With those exceptions, it was agreed that the Western should supersede the Pacific coast classification on business from Mississippi River points and Chicago destined to the Pacific coast. At the same time an award, by one chosen to determine certain disputed questions pertaining to El Paso and other traffic, decreed that the Western classification should hereafter govern on freight destined to El Paso, Eagle Pass, and the Republic of Mexico, and tariffs were issued accordingly.

Shortly before the Texas connections of the Fort Worth and Denver City Railroad had consented to adopt the Western classification on business carried to and from Colorado and Utah. Furthermore, the Texas lines signified their willingness to unite with the Western roads in the adoption of a joint classification. Hence, it was presumed that within a brief time there would practically be but one classification in use in the territory west of Chicago and the Mississippi River. The impression was that in thus securing uniformity in the territory west of that reached by the trunk lines, they would possibly be accomplishing as much as did the latter when they consolidated into one the many classifications which previously governed in the district between the Atlantic and the Mississippi, north of the Ohio River.

The divergent views herein before described as held by your committee have been honestly entertained, and the conclusions reached, both on the part of the East and the West, are such as the varying circumstances and conditions of each section seem to make necessary. It remains for your committee to express their sincere regret that after so much earnest toil their expectations of being able at this time to submit for your approval a joint classification are doomed to disappointment.

The Commission was disposed to recognize fully the embarrassments of the situation as here depicted, and deemed it its duty to state "that all action taken on the subject should lead toward uniformity, but that to force it at once would be undesirable.". It was deemed proper, also, to call attention to the fact that the carriers are by no means the only parties to be affected by a general harmonizing of the various classifications. As classification is but a general method of establishing rates

on different commodities of commerce, the existence of a different classification of any article on different railroads means, generally speaking, a different rate charged for transporting it. Unifying the classification would mean, therefore, a change in the rate. The carriers in making the change might very well, in adjusting the general average of charges, protect themselves, to a large extent at least, from the loss arising from reductions on certain commodities. But the business interests of the different communities to be affected, having no means of recovering by increased prices on one line of goods the losses they might sustain by reason of increased traffic charges on another, might frequently, for a time at least, suffer serious detriment from the change.

The Commission summed up its conclusions on this subject in the report for 1888 as follows:

(1) Uniformity in classification, as fast and as far as it can be accomplished without serious mischiefs, is desirable.

(2) There is gratifying progress in the direction of unification, and it has been very marked within the last year.

(3) So long as the carriers appear to be laboring towards unification with reasonable diligence and in good faith, it is better that they should be encouraged and stimulated to continue their efforts than that the work should be taken out of their hands.

(4) In view of the mischiefs that would flow from sudden changes, ample time should be given for the purpose.

Uniform classification can only be wisely and safely made by careful study and deliberate action, and the adjustment of rates to it needs corresponding caution and deliberation.

The carriers certainly could not fairly infer from this language that the Commission intended to abandon the efforts it had since its organization persistently made to bring them to act upon this important subject. Yet during the next year no very great progress was made in the direction of uniformity, and in the opinion of the Commission no proper effort was made by the carriers to that end. Something, it is true, was accomplished by the absorption into the three principal classifications of the country-namely, the Official, the Western, and the Southern Railway and Steamship Association-of the special and exceptional classifications existing in the territories respectively covered by those principal classifications.

But in its annual report for 1889 the Commission, in reference to the progress made by interstate carriers in the matter of uniform classification, felt it proper to say:

It is to be regretted that the results attained have not been equal during this period to what the indications then existing led us to expect might be accomplished at the time of the presentation to Congress of our second annual report.

In September, 1888, shortly after the announcement of the failure to consolidate the Official and Western classifications, the attempt at which has been referred to above, a resolution was introduced and passed in the House of Representatives directing the Commission

prior to January 1, 1889, to prescribe one uniform classification of freight for the use and guidance of the various railroads of the United States engaged in interstate commerce. The resolution, however, failed in the Senate, representations having been made that if the railroad companies were given further time they would obviate the necessity for Congressional action. The failure of this resolution to pass the Senate was a circumstance which the Commission did not regret, since it appeared then, as it does now, that the action desired could be taken by the railway authorities themselves, if they could within any reasonable time be induced to act, with much less risk of injury to the financial interests of the carriers and of the public than would probably attend the efforts of the Commission or any other public agency to establish a uniform classification.

Prompted, partly perhaps by the disposition thus manifested in the popular branch of Congress and urged thereto by the pressure constantly brought to bear by the Commission, or it may be in the general interests of commerce and with a view to the benefits to be ultimately derived by the carriers from uniformity in classification, a call was issued by the leading traffic associations in November, 1888, for a conference of railway representatives upon this subject. The conference met in Chicago in the following December, and from the general attendance upon it appeared to promise good results. Eight traffic associations were represented-the representatives coming from the Pacific States, the South, the West, the Middle, the East, and New England. Nothing was done by the conference itself further than to pass resolutions to the effect that greater uniformity in the classification of freight is both desirable and practicable, but that the magnitude and diversity of the interests involved are such that strict uniformity can not be reached by forced or hurried measures, without injury to business, while it may be approximated by frequent conferences and constant effort on the part of the carriers. The conference, however, appointed a standing committee, composed of two members from each of the traffic associations, for the purpose of unifying as rapidly as possible the several classifications in force. This committee was instructed "to endeavor to combine the existing classifications in one general classification by the use of such number of classes as will prevent conflicting commodity as well as class rates in the several sections of the country, without sacrificing the proper interests of the carriers."

This committee met in Chicago in February, 1889, with a full representation either in person or by proxy, and remained in session seven days. But nothing practical was accomplished. The same question between the interests of the East and the West appears to have divided the committee as resulted in the failure of the previous year's conference. The Western representatives claimed that they had not sufficient representation on the committee, and an adjournment was had to meet in New