exist these causes of complaint. There is no one gentleman in this Convention who has yet risen to say that there is no such cause of complaint, except the gentleman from Philadelphia, and I apprehend that with all his ability-and it is not disputed-the views of that gentleman must largely be referred to his peculiar associations and the relations in which he stands; and when I say this I say it with no disrespect, for every man's opinions and views are colored by the circumstances in which he lives. We are not apt to look with disfavor upon the things which we do ourselves or the means by which we undertake to accomplish our purpose. Now, sir, is this Convention determined that it will do nothing in this regard for the relief of the people of this State? The objection to the amendment of the gentleman from Lycoming was struck at once and directly by the interrogation, as I understood it, of the gentleman from Franklin (Mr. Sharpe.) I understood it to be admitted by the gentleman from Lycoming that his amendment would not prevent such a discrimination against the people of this State, as that the labor, the manufacturing productions, the enterprise, the, produce of every kind of other States, might not be brought through here at such rates as would discriminate against and even destroy the enterprise and the industry of our own people. It would not prevent the manufacturer of Chicago, as the illustration was, from bringing his goods to Philadelphia, past the very door of the manufacturer of Pittsburg, and putting them in this market at a lower rate for the expense of transportation than it would place the same articles for the manufacturer in Pittsburg in this market. Now, sir, any amendment which has that practical effect never ought to receive the sanction of this body. What we ask is simple justice; what we ask is fairness of dealing in this matter as regards the citizens of this State. We do not say that we can come down here and lay a line of strict and accurate demarcation. That is not our idea at all. It is not practicable, I admit, to do that. At the best, you can only approximate it, and at the very best this section and the amendment of the gentleman from Allegheny are but an approximation to the right rule. But it is necessary in a matter of this kind that there should be some play given, that there should be some room for the great transporting corporations of the Commonwealth to arrange their business within certain limits; and the practical limit here defined is that the citizen of the State shall not be put at a disadvantage in comparison with the citizens of other States, and the citizens within the State shall not be injuriously discriminated against as between themselves. That is the whole principle involved in this. It is justice, justice as nearly as you can attain, not exact in all that we should do if it lay in our power, as I apprehend, for the people of the State, but it is all that we can do. We can approach the mark no nearer than that. Sir, I shall not undertake, and I should not, I suppose, be able to do so, to reply to all the arguments of the gentleman from Philadelphia; but I did want to bring distinctly before the members of this Convention these particular provisions of this section; and I do not think, however ably the argument may be put, as ably as any argument ever was put by any advocate for his clients in any court, that this Convention is willing to consent to the course of policy suggested by the gentleman from Philiadelphia, and to surrender everything, without any check, to the corporations of the State, give no relief, whatever, to the people, and pay no attention to their call, because, with regard to this matter, the people have called upon this Convention to act. This report is not the mere spontaneous growth of the Committee on Railroads and Canals. They did not act merely upon their own inward consciousness in preparing something of this kind for the purpose of bringing it before the consideration of this Convention, to manifest that they had a miraculous understanding of all the workings of this great subject. They did not even, in the most particular of these propositions, deserve the credit of originality. As to some of the language, it is an exact copy of that which has been furnished to them by others. They accepted it, because they believed it was intelligible, and because it was as near an approximation as they could get to the exact mark of justice, and with that view they have presented it to this Convention, in the earnest hope that it will meet its approbation and be adopted by it. Mr. HOWARD. I regret that we are compelled to submit a proposition of this magnitude and importance to the people of this Commonwealth in so small a Convention. It is a little too small, I should think, for practical purposes, and I am afraid it is too small to act with safety for the people of this State. I have listened to the very extraordinary argument of the delegate from Philadelphia, (Mr. Cuyler,) and it certainly was very eloquent. It ought to have been eloquent because a portion of it was expressing his own particular gratitude to the gentleman to whom, I have no doubt, he is under very great obligations; and perhaps some of the rest of us would be equally grateful if placed in the same circumstances. But the butt-end of the argument, and all there was in it, was this: That if we dared to do justice to the people of Pennsylvania, then they would somehow or other be compelled to fall back upon the original rights conferred in their charter and in some way they would have to crush out our trade in order that they might still compete for the trade of other States. There may be something in that argument that looks as if it amounted to something, but it so happens that there is nothing in it at all. I hold in my hand the report of the Pennsylvania railroad company, sworn to by J. Edgar Thomson, in which he swears that the cost of the carriage of freight is so much per ton per mile, and that at their very lowest rates they make thirty-three per cent., and that is certainly enough. Mr. CUYLER. Will the gentleman pardon an interruption. That thirty-three per cent. has to be charged with all the interest on the investment of the company. concerned, they cannot do it. I have read here the act of Assembly that was passed when they got the tonnage tax repealed. There was then a new deal so far as their charges upon the main line are concerned, and they expressly agreed in that act of Assembly to what they call now one of the most obnoxious features of this section, namely: That they shall not charge for a shorter distance more than they do for a greater. That is expressly stipulated in that act of Assembly, and they signed it as a part of the new contract, and filed it in the office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth. Here it is laid down in this sworn report of the president of the Pennsylvania railroad company that the actual cost of carrying a ton of freight is a fraction less than seven-eighths of a cent. Why, their average charge, with all this competition, is over a cent and one-third, and that is for through freight, and they charge more than that on their local freights, and they say that if we ask them for justice they will be compelled to retaliate upon the people of the Commonwealth. It is not true in point of fact. According to their own showing, they can make on their own rate thirty-three per cent. over and above the cost. But they say that they must make their discriminations on account of the through passengers. I want to look at that. I have not had the report for 1872 but I have for 1871, and I find that in that year the Pennsylvania railroad carried passengers to the number of four million six hundred and ninety-nine thousand. How many outsiders, for whom such eloquent appeals are made, do you suppose were included in that number? It has been told us that the people of Pennsylvania are to be destroyed for the sake of this outside passenger trade. I have already said that the entire number of passengers carried over the Penr Mr. HOWARD. I understand that, but still it is a pretty large profit. If any man engaged in any business manages his affairs with any sort of prudence, out of thirty-three per cent. he ought to meet his expenses and have a little over. Mr. CUYLER. That only realizes a net sylvania railroad company was nearly five ten per cent. to the stockholders. Mr. HOWARD. I understand that, too; but I say that at this margin of profit on the lowest rate of freight carried by them they ought to realize and do realize a handsome dividend on every share of stock they have issued, and yet every time we come here and ask for justice we are met by the threat, "if you dare to do justice to the people, we will retaliate upon them by going back to our charter." It happens that so far as the main line is millions, and out of this number about one hundred and eighty-six thousand were outsiders, not one outsider to twenty-six Pennsylvanians. And these outsiders are to have more favorable terms than the people of the State, and the oppressive discriminations under which we have labored are to be continued in order that these one hundred and eighty-six thousand outsiders may be carried at less rates! There is no necessity for this state of things. This railroad company can honestly carry the people of this State and of other States for a great deal less money than was originally stipulated as the maximum in their charter. I maintain here that this question does not stand upon the charter as far as that road is concerned, and if it did, I hold that the charter can never be used by the road as an instrument of fraud to crush the industry of Pennsylvania, and it would be so used if they are to be permitted to still keep up the maximum charges fixed in the charter for Pennsylvania passengers and Pennsylvania freights and then to bring New Jersey, Ohio and New York passengers and freights into Pennsylvania at rates so low as to crush out the local industry of this State. Whenever they do that, I have no doub: the courts will step in and say: "This people of Pennsylvania gave you life and vitality and they gave you all the rights you have and you cannot use those rights to crush them." It would never be tolerated. Then what remains of the gentleman's argument? There is no argument in it. There is no necessity for it. They can carry their freights and passengers at a reasonable price, and they can still make a fair profit and they can do justice to our people, and that is all we ask. We only ask that they shall not discriminate against the people of Pennsylvania. Who would have supposed that we should have been compelled to listen to an able, eloquent and ingenious speech, of very considerable length, to prove that that would ruin the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, a proposition that if the railroad companies should not be allowed to discriminate against the industries of the people of this Commonwealth, the people of the State will be ruined! Why, Mr. President, the man that makes such an argument as that must have been prompted by some very peculiar arrangement. I myself cannot understand it. It is perfectly right that a man should be grateful; it is perfectly right that he should eulogize Mr. Scott and Mr. Thomson and set them up just as high as he pleases; but there are some people in the State who believe that while Mr. Thomson and Mr. Scott may have done much for Philadelphia, they have done injustice to other parts of the Commonwealth; that they have discriininated against them and stricken down their industries, and they know it. Why, sir, the people of Philadelphia to-day, if they would vote for this proposition, would be largely benefited in bringing here the coal that makes the gas which lightstheir city, for they would get it at a far cheaper rate. This Convention has already struck out of one of the sections of this article the very important clause that the officers of any railroad company shall not be engaged in miring or manufacturing articles to be transported on roads of which they are officers. Yet we all know that the gas coal that comes to Philadelphia is entirely in the hands of a monopoly. No man west of the mountains can engage in this mining business and compete with the gas coal monopoly, because the officers of the Pennsylvania railroad company have possession of that trade, and possession of the transportation. They can make their own special rates to suit themselves, and they furnish themselves with facilities and with their own cars which no one else can procure. Yet in the face of all these facts, with this industry absolutely prostrate and monopolized by these men, and in. the hands of the "ring" men of the Pennsylvaria railroad company, we are told that if we adopt the simple proposition here proposed to do justice to the great body of the people, it will be the ruin of the Commonwealth. It ought to be the ruin of some of these monopolies, at least so far other men. as to bring them down to an equality with That is all we ask, nothing more, nothing less, than that the railroad companies shall not discriminate against the people of this Commonwealth. Mr. ARMSTRONG. I now modify my proposed amendment to the amendment by striking out all after the word “thereof," and inserting: "Passengers and property transported by any such company shall be delivered at any station within the State at charges not exceeding the charges for the transportation of per-ous and property of the same class in the sume direction to any more distant station." Mr. T. H. B. PATTERSON. I wish to call attention to the fact that this amendment to the amendment leaves out entirely all that which relates to drawbacks and special rates, and does not provide for excursion or cominutation tickets at all. Mr. ARMSTRONG. I was about to remark that the subject of drawbacks was covered by the section, and that part of it relating to commutation tickets might be added if any gentleman desired it. Mr. CAMPBELL. I ask for the yeas and journ. nays. The House is thin and it is not fair to take the question in its present The yeas and nays were ordered, ten condition. members rising to second the call. Mr. HARRY WHITE. I want to know after the remark of the delegate from Lycoming what is the exact state of the amendment. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The amend ment to the amendment will be read again. Mr. CUYLER. I quite agree with the gentleman from York. hope the Convention will adjourn, and adjourn until September. The yeas and The PRESIDENT pro tem. nays have been ordered on the amend ment. Mr. T. H. B. PATTERSON. A call of The CLERK. It is proposed to add these the House was asked for before the yeas words: and nays were ordered. I insist on a call of the House. "And no special rates or drawbacks shall, either directly or indirectly, be allowed, except excursion and commutation tickets." Mr. HARRY WHITE. Does the gentleman from Lycoming adopt that as part of his amendinent? Mr. COCHRAN. I ask that the roll may be called to determine whether there is a quorum present. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The yeas and nays will determine whether there is a quorum present or not. The Clerk will call the numɔ3 of dələğɩtes. The CLERK proceeded to call the roll on the amendment to the amendment. Mr. MANTOR [when his name was called.] I am paired on this question with the gentleman from Dauphin, (Mr. Mr. EDWARDS. The yeas and nays will Lamberton,) who was opposed to the sec determine it. Mr. BOYD. I move an adjournment. Mr. ARMSTRONG. What I propose to add to my amendinent is: "But commutation tickets to passengers may be issued as heretofore, and reasonable extra rates within the limits of the charter may be made in charges for any distance not exceeding fifty miles." Mr. COCHRAN. I do not know now the exaet terms of the amendment. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Clerk, for information, will read the entire amendment of the delegatǝ from Lycoming. The CLERK. The amendment to the amendment is to strike out all after the word "thereof" and insert: "Persons and property transported by any such company shall be delivered at any station within the State at charges not exceeding the charges for the transportation of persons and property of the same class in the same direction to any more distant station; but commutation tickets to passengers may be issued as heretofore, and reasonable extra rates within the limits of the charter may be made in charges for any distance not exceeding fifty miles." Mr. COCHRAN. I understand there is nothing about drawbacks in it. I should like to appeal to the Convention to ad tion, and I in favor of it. The CLERK resumed and concluded the call of the roll. Mr. CUYLER [after having voted in the negative.] I desire to change my vote and to vote for the amendment, not because I agree with the amendment, but because I think it better than the section as originally written. Then I propose to vote against the section. Therefore I ask leave to change my vote. Mr. T. H. B. PATTERSON. The PRESIDENT pro ten. tleman vote in mistake? I object. Did the gen Mr. CUYLER. I cannot say that I did, but I would prefer to make that change. The PRESIDENT pro tem. If the gentleman voted in mis'ake, he has the right to change his vote. Mr. CUYLER. I cannot conscientiously say that I voted in mistake, but I think it would be wiser to vote for the amendment because I think it is better than the section. Mr. DARLINGTON. If the gentleman voted under any misapprehension of the effect of his vote, he has the right to change. Mr. BUCKALEW. I should like to inquire whether we have a rule prohibiting members from changing their votes. Under the general parliamentary law any member has an absolute right to change his vote at any time before the result is announced. In the Legislature by special rule we have no change of vote, but I do not think that rule prevails here. The PRESIDENT pro tem. I think the gentleman from Columbia is correct, and that the delegate has a right to change his vote. Mr. COCHRAN. It certainly has been the practice hitherto in this body not to allow the change of a vote unless where a delegate voted under a misapprehension. The PRESIDENT pro tem. It will not change the result, and I think the delegate may change his vote, The CLERK again called the name of Mr. Cuyler. Mr. HARRY WHITE. I rise toa question of order, because this may become an exceedingly important matter. ["No." "No."] I claim my privilege of raising the question of order. read the names of the delegates after they have been called, and no delegates shall be permitted," &c. Mr. HARRY WHITE. I understand the question to have been decided. Mr. CUYLER. I will not make any change. I learn that there are other gentlemen whose votes were somewhat affected by mine, and it would perhaps be hardly right that I should make the change. I therefore withdraw my request. The result was then announced as follows: YEAS. Messrs. Ainey, Armstrong, Barclay, Bigler, Black, Chas. A., Boyd, Brodhead, Brown, Buckalew, Carter, Clark, Corbett, Cronmiller, Curry, Darlington, Edwards, Elliott, Fell, Fulton, Hall, Lilly, MacConnell, M'Culloch, Mann, Niles, The PRESIDENT pro tem. What is the Purman, Purviance, Samuel A., Reed, question of order? Mr. HARRY WHITE. My question of order is that the delegate has not a right to change his vote unless he states that he voted under a misapprehension of the question. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Will the delegate turn to the rule wherein that is laid down? Mr. LILLY. Rule thirty-six. Mr. HARRY WHITE. I will read it: "On the call of the yeas and nays, one of the secretaries shall read the names of the delegates after they have been called, and no delegate shall be permitted to change his vote, unless he at that time declares that he voted under a mistake of the question." I raise the question of order. Mr. BUCKALEW. Mr. President: My question is answered. I did not know that we had adopted the rule which prevails in the Legislature on this subject. Mr. HARRY WHITE. It is the common parliamentary practice. Mr. ARMSTRONG. Under this ruleThe PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair decides that the delegate cannot change his vote. Mr. ARMSTRONG. I would suggest to the Chair that it is after the names have been called. Until that time it is entirely within the discretion of members. The rule says: "One of the secretaries shall Andrew, Simpson, Struthers, Walker and White, J. W. F.—32. NAYS. Messrs. Achenbach, Alricks, Baer, Baly, (Perry,) Bailey, (Huntingdon,) Biddle, Bullitt, Calvin, Campbell, Carey, Church, Cochran, Curtin, Cuyler, De France, Ellis, Ewing, Finney, Funck, Gilpin, Guthrie, Horton, Howard, Kaine, Landis, Lawrence, M'Murray, Newlin, Patterson, D. W., Patterson, T. H. B., Patton, Reynolds, Rooke, Sharpe, Smith, H. G., Smith, Wm. H., Temple, Turrell, White, David N., and White, Harry,-10. So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. ABSENT-Messrs. Addicks, Andrews, Baker, Bannan, Bardsley, Bartholomew, Beebe, Black, J. S., Bowman, Broomall, Cassidy, Collins, Corson, Craig, Dallas, Davis, Dodd, Dunning, Gibson, Green, Hanna, Harvey, Hay, Hazzard, Hemphill, Heverin, Hunsicker, Knight, Lamberton, Lear, Littleton, Long, MacVeagh, M'Camant, M'Clean, Mantor, Metzger, Minor, Mitchell, Mott, Palmer, G. W., Palmer, H. W., Parsons, Porter, Pughe, Purviance, John N., Read, John R., Ross, Runk, Russell, Smith, Henry W., Stanton, Stewart, Van Reed, Wetherill, J. M., Wetherill, John Price, Wherry, Woodward, Worrell, Wright and Meredith, President-61. |