TWENTY-FOURTH ANNUAL FRUIT-GROWERS' CONVENTION. 29 



They all certainly recognize the value of regulation and information, and as good citi- 

 zens must favor good government and square dealing. 



The special advantage to the shippers by rail, comprising the producers of about one 

 third of the total perishables, and probably more than one half of the more tender 

 fruits, would be : 



1. Equal advantage of location as compared with shippers by water. 



2. Equal participation in the competition of buyers who principally congregate at 

 the Free Market on the wharves where the bulk of the product is now sold. 



3. Delivery averaging probably two hours earlier than now. 



4. Avoidance of injury to tender fruits by bounding over the rough cobblestone pave- 

 ments of San Francisco, which must be seen to be appreciated. 



5. The saving, upon the basis of an arithmetical computation on the basis of the per- 

 ishables delivered by rail in San Francisco in 1896, at the rates usually charged for 

 drayage in that city, of over $80,000 per annum, less drayage on whatever residue might 

 not be actually disposed of in the market and so be hauled to commission houses or 

 storage. This cash saving of course will increase with growth of population and trade. 



The law of the State and the " Regulations of the Free Market," duly adopted by the 

 Board of State Harbor Commissioners, require all these things to be done. As a matter 

 of fact none of them are done. 



The attempt to carry out this program brings us athwart three important interests : 



1. The railroads, which meant at first only the Southern Pacific Company, but now 

 means both them and the Santa Fe so far as the latter brings perishables to the city. 

 No conference has ever been had with the Santa Fe officials. If all other perishables 

 are delivered to the Free Market the Santa Fe will only be too anxious to deliver theirs 

 also. The first step taken by the producers' committee was to ask whether or not the 

 Southern Pacific Company would make the Free Market its regular terminal for perish- 

 ables. The answer was yes, upon two conditions, which were: first, that they should 

 be at liberty to load cars there, in which perishables had been delivered; and, second, 

 that they should be at liberty to use the tracks and sheds for the delivery of general 

 merchandise at seasons when the room was not required for the delivery of perishables. 

 Otherwise not, as the delivery of perishables at that point would, of itself and without 

 some compensating advantage, be a serious expense which the company would refuse 

 to assume. It happens that there is no possible objection to either of these things, but 

 on the contrary they are earnestly desired by the wholesale merchants of San Francisco, 

 who had, in writing, as individuals, and by their Chamber of Commerce, petitioned for 

 it, before the Free Market agitation began. The producers' committee, therefore, agreed 

 that, so far as they could control matters, it was a " whack," and the agitation has pro- 

 ceeded upon the understanding between the committee and the Southern Pacific Com- 

 pany that perishables should be delivered to the Free Market as a regular terminal upon 

 the conditions stated. They certainly will never be delivered there without extra charge 

 on any other conditions. 



Between the company and the committee, however, there is one point which remains 

 unsettled, because neither party has ever been ready to bring it to an issue. The blocks 

 upon which it is proposed that the State shall extend its railroad tracks for the use of 

 the Free Market, now pay the State rent aggregating $600 per month, which is much 

 less than they are worth— or $7,200 per annum. It was the secret intention of the 

 committee that the railroad tracks used for this delivery of perishables and other 

 merchandise should yield a rent, to be paid by the companies using them, equal to that 

 now received from the steamship company. It was the secret intention of the railroad 

 company to get the use of the tracks, at least for perishables, without rent, their claim 

 being that the use of the tracks rent free would be no more than an offset for the extra 

 cost of delivering cars there, as compared with the cost of delivering them at King' and 

 Townsend Streets, a mile and a half away. The committee did not force this issue in 

 1896, when these discussions were had, because they were of the opinion that if forced 

 at that time the company would buck, and have nothing further to do with the matter, 

 because, so far as the committee could see, it was about a toss up with the railroad 

 which way it went. Since that time conditions have so changed that I am personally 

 of the opinion that the railroad will pay the $7,200 per year rent, rather than not have 

 it go. I may be mistaken. There will certainly be a hard fight before the Harbor 



