192 PROCEEDINGS OF TWENTY-SIXTH FRUIT-GROWERs' CONVENTION. 



minimum weight car to New York prevails, which amounts to a net reduction of QQ% 

 per cent. 



I will now give you some of the reasons why I feel justified in interrogating you 

 upon the subject of refrigeration charges, and the possibility of a reduction from the 

 present rate being made for next season. 



When the F. G. E. Company's cars were accepted by the Porter Bros. Company, the 

 rate from Sacramento to New York was $130 per car, and it was then understood that 

 the shipper might put in as much weight as he pleased, without extra charge for 

 refrigeration. 



At this time there was strong competition, which necessitated the employment of 

 special representatives who were sent into the various fruit districts to solicit business. 

 Now there is no competition. 



The Armour lines have a monopoly of the fruit-carrying business from California to 

 Eastern markets. 



No longer is there need to employ agents to solicit business for its cars, for the 

 shipper has to use them or none. These facts shoidd, and no doubt do, make an *^ enor- 

 mous reduction " in the expense of the company. 



There is another reason that it seems would justify the belief that a reduction of no 

 small magnitude could be made in the rates now prevailing, and still leave an enor- 

 mous profit to the Armour Company, and this is the fact that the companies now 

 under its control charged some years since but a small proportion of its present Cali- 

 fornia rates for Oregon and Washington fruit shipments, and it is reasonable to assume 

 that the refrigerator lines then doing business in these two States were doing it at a 

 fair and reasonable profit. 



In support of the correctness of this assumption, I offer the fact that the refrigerator 

 cars are still doing business in these localities at a $35 rate to New York and other 

 places. 



You assume that the season of 1901 has been a very prosperous one for the California 

 fruit-grower. 



I wish I could join you in this assumption, but I can not do so so far as Eastern 

 shipments are concerned, for some of them have brought "red ink" returns. That is, 

 the price that they brought did not pay the transportation and commission charges, 

 and others brought but little more; while many others failed to bring a profit to the 

 growers when all costs are taken into consideration, including production, picking, 

 packing, materials used — such as crates, boxes, nails, paper, etc. — taxes, together with 

 a fair interest on the capital invested, and only equal to that which they have to pay 

 upon the mortgaged indebtedness, if they have any, and the rule is that they have. 



It is true that some growers have made money this year, but it is one year in ten, 

 since 1891, that but few of them have been able to do so by shipping East; therefore, it 

 would be unreasonable, and certainly it would not promote the horticultural interests 

 of the State, to establish as a basis, from which to fix rates for refrigeration, the 

 maximum prices received for shipments. 



It frequently occurs that a grower receives what might be termed enormous prices 

 for one shipment, and losing prices for ten others. 



In conclusion, I will say, that there is no guarantee that prices that will bring a profit 

 to the growers will prevail next year, nor for years thereafter, but, on the contrary, it is 

 not at all improbable, and certainly not impossible, that conditions may prevail that 

 will result disastrously to many of the growers ; therefore, every care and precaution 

 should be taken to prevent such a result, and this is why I am appealing to you now, 

 hoping that you will see your way clear to recommend to your company a material 

 reduction in its present charges for refrigeration. 



Respectfully vours, 



R. D. STEPHENS, 

 Chairman F. G. Transportation Committee. 



