« 上一页继续 »
APPLE RECIPE BOOKLET—Mr. Border is prepared to print and furnish any number of the Recipe Booklets you can use. This is an admirable and valuable booklet. It is a fine advertising proposition. Sales cannot help but be multiplied through its use. Put it out to the consumer. This is one chance in a million. Don't Miss It. Raise a fund for whatever number of booklets you desire and notify Jir. Boriler at once. This is too good a prospect to pass up.
PUBLICITY IN ST. JOSEPH-Our members in St. Joseph, Mo., have raised a substantial advertising fund and are using it in their daily press. In a recent issue of one of their papers was a full half page advertisement giving the retail prices of apples, encouraging purchases by the quantity and giving the names of scores of retailers from whom fruit could be purchased at the advertised prices, which were reasonable. Good work. Keep it up.
NEW MEMBERS.- The names of all new members will be published next month and the names of our regular members entitled to the credit for bringing them in. Will Your Name Be There? Every member has one month to get on the honor roll. Send in the applications.
LEGISLATION—This Association now has for attention the Tuttle Bill (involving Standard Packages) : the Prouty Bill (printed in this issue); the Nelson Bill (relating to Trans-Atlantic Transportation), all in the National Congress. In the New York State Assembly we are interested in the Hamilton Bill ( which restricts storage of apples, and we are fighting it): the Thompson Bill (aimed at car shortages); the Roosevelt Bill (licensing and bonding commission merchants); the Hover Bill (printed in this issue).
The Greatest Protection You Have In Your Business Is Your Association. The Prouty Bill---H. R. 26678
Read Carefully-It Is Important Introduced in the House of Representatives Dec. 4th, 1912, by Hon. S. F. Prouty of lowa, and Referred to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce
A BILL To facilitate transportation and to prevent the use of railroad cars for
storage purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it shall be unlawful for any railroad company engaged in interstate commerce to use or permit to be used for storage purposes any cars employed in interstate traffic, for a longer period than five days, whether demurrage is or is not charged for said use or detention by the shipper, providel said cars are needed for handling, with reasonable dispatch, the freight offered to it for transportation as a common carrier.
Sec. 2. That if any shipper shall order cars, which he does not load and consign for transportation, within forty-eight hours after same have been properly placed for loading, then the said railroad company shall immediately notify such shipper that unless same are so loaded and ready for transportation within three days from the giving of said notice, that the same will be removed by said company. If at the expiration of the said three days the same have not been so loaded and consigned for transportation, the said railroad company shall remove said cars and deliver them to other shipper or shippers, provided there are other shipper or shippers who have placed orders for similar cars, and which orders have not been otherwise filled.
Sec. 3. That if any such cars loaded with freight are properly placed for unloading by any such railroad company and the consignee does not unload or cause to be unloaded the same within forty-eight hours after the same has been so placed, then the said railroad company shall immediately notify said party that if the said car or cars are not so unloaded within three days from the giving of said notice that the said company will unload sail cars and store said freight in its own or other warehouse at the expense of the said consignee; and it shall be the duty of the said railroad company to give said notice and to unload and store said goods as herein provided, and the said! railroad company shall have a lien upon said gools for the reasonable expense of unloading and storing said freight. But nothing in this Act shall be construed as preventing any such railroad company from making reasonable rules and regulations providing for demurrage on such cars.
Sec. 4. That if any such railroad company shall fail, neglect, or refuse to furnish cars within five days after written order has been placed for same by any shipper, and said shipper is damaged by reason of said failure to so furnish cars, said railroad company shall be prima facie liable to said shipper for the actual damages suffered by him by reason of the failure of the said company to furnish said cars; and in addition thereto said company sliall be liable to sai:! shipper in the sum of five dollars per day for each car for each day said company fails to furnish same after the expiration of the said five days wless it be shown that the said railroad company has substantially complied with the requirements and provisions of this Act and notwithstanding the same has been unable to furnish said car or cars by the crercise of reasonable diligence.
The Prouty Bill Considered
Analysis And Comment We do not know by whom this bill was inspired nor who was primarily responsible for its introduction.
Its evident purpose is, or ought to be, to remedy three patent and crying evils: (1) Unreasonable delay in loading at point of origin ; (2) Unreasonable delay in unloading at destination ; (3) Failure of the railroads to provide suitable equipment within a reasonable time. Section 2 relates to loading : Section 3 to unloading; and Section 4 to the furnishing of equipment.
THE SHIPPER With reference to Sections 2 and 3, it is difficult to accurately determine just how much of the annual car shortage is caused by unreasonable delay in loading or unloading. We do know, however, that these two things contribute to it. During the present season instances have come to our knowledge in a limited territory where refrigerator cars have been held by shippers, either in:ler a full or part load, all the way from five to twenty-seven days. A car of apples was held on track 27 days before billing out. Other cars of cabbage and apples were held 23 lays, 20 days, 15 days, and so on down. The excuses given were either that they were held until a market could be found or waiting for farmers to haul the produce.
Unquestionably there is abuse along these lines. Cars should not be used for storage purposes. There can never be proper car service under such conditions. Railroads can not be expected to furnish cars for both transportation and storage. Thus far the evil has not been prevented by clemurrage.
The time allowed by Sections 2 and 3 for loading and unloading seems to be reasonable. To make Section 2 more effective and to reach those cases where one or two loads of produce are placed in a car for the purpose of holding it indefinitely, provision should be made for unloading at the point of origin, whatever may be in it at the expiration of the period. Due notice to unload should be incorporated in this Section, the same as in Section 3.
THE RAILROAD With reference to Section 4, there is no question that the railroads themselves are chiefly responsible for car shortages. It is caused by three things: (1) Inadequate equipment; (2) Improper distribution; (3) Delayed movement after billing.
As a rule railroads put off until next year what ought to be done today. Sufficient cars are not provided for the traffic involved. Therefore something similar to Section 4 is needed and ought to be reasonably effective.
Section + down to the semi-colon after the word "cars" is all right. After the semi-colon, however, commencing with the words “And In Addition Thereto" changes should be mare. This part of the Section imposing a daily penalty upon the railroads of $5.00 per day for each day's delay after the crpiration of five days is absolutely nullifier by the last clause of the Section. This clause reads, “UNLESS IT BE SHOJVN THAT THE SAD RULR010). COMPATILAS SUBSTITIALLY COMPLIED ITITH THE REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT AND NOTITITIISTANDING THE SAME HAS BEEN UNABLE TO FURNISH SAID CAR OR CARS BY THE EXERCISE OF REASOVIBLE DILIGENCE."
It would be the easiest thing in the world for a railroad to show that it had complied with the provisions of the bill and thereby escape the penalty. Furthermore, if by any chance this last clause should be held to apply to the First part of the Section, i. e., that part which precedes the words "and in addition thereto," it would absolve them from ALL liability under the Act and might possibly even modify their present Common and Statute Law Liability.
As the only legitimate purpose this Section can have is to compel railroads to furnish proper equipment within a reasonable time, the clause specified should be absolutely stricken from the bill.
In addition, that shippers' interests may be properly protected, a new section should be added as follows:
SECTION 5. Nothing In This Act Shall In Any Way Affect The Now Existing Common Law And Statute Law Liability Of Railroads To Furnish Cars For The Transportation Of Freight.
Unless these changes are made in Section 4 and a proper provision made to fully protect existing rights, as suggested by Section 5, it is our judgment that This Bill Should Be Opposed.
MAKE KNOWN YOUR WISHES If these changes, or changes that accomplish the same result, are made, Are You In Favor Of The Bill? This is a matter in which you are vitally interested. We must know your desires in order to carry them
This is something concerning which every member should speak. Adcise the Secretary at once.
Proposed Special Quince And Pear Barrel
The Hover Bill, New York State Assembly No. 673 Introduced by Hon. A. W. Hover January 30, 1913, and referred to the
Committee on General Laws.
( Explanation-Matter in italics is new; matter in brackets ( ) is old law to be omitted.)
AN ACT To Amend the General Business Law, in Relation to
Standard Barrels for Pears and Quinces The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Section sixteen-a of chapter twenty-five of the laws of nineteen hundred and nine, entitled "An act relating to general business, constituting chapter twenty of the consolidated laws," as added by chapter eighty-one of the laws of nineteen hundred and twelve, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 16-a. Certain sizes of containers when used for vegetables, produce and fruit prescribe'l. No person shall manufacture, sell, offer or expose for sale containers for vegetables, produce or fruit that are not of the capacity of one barrel, half barrel, one bushel, or multiples of the barrel or sub-multiples of the bushel divisible by two: provided, however, that fruits, vegetables and produce may be sold in other sized containers if the net capacity in terms of standaril dry measure, is plainly and conspicuously marked, branded or otherwise indicated in the English languiage on the outside or top thereof, or is marked in accordance with the provisions of section seventeen. A barrel, other than a barrel for pears or quinces, shall, within the meaning of this and the ensuing sections of this article (shall) represent a quantity equal to seventy hundred and fifty-six cubic inches or conform to the following dimensions: Head diameter, seventeen and one-eighth inches; length of stave, twenty-eiglit and one-half inches; bilge not less than sixty-four inches outside measurement; distance between head's not less than twenty-six inches; and to be known as a standard barrel. A barrel, when used as a container for pears or quinces, shall, within the meaning of this and the ensuing sections of this article, represent a quantity equal to sirty-four hundred and four and thirty-nine hundredthis cubic inches or conform to the following dimensions: Head diameter, sixteen and one-half inches; length of stare, twenty-eight and one-half inches; bilge not less than sixty-one and onehalf inches outside measurement: distance betaveen heads not less than taventy-sir inches; and to be known as a standard pear and quince barrel. A reasonable variation of the capacity specified shall be allowed.
Sec. 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
The effect of this Bill is to amend the Brooks' Law now in force in the State of New York by providing a SPECIAL STANDARD B.ARREL FOR OULCES AND PEARS, LESS IN SIZE THAN THE APPLE BARREL. The Brooks' Law took care of all barrels of smaller size than the standard by permitting the use of such barrels if the capacity of the same were marked on the outside. In other words the Brooks Law allows Quinces and Pears to be packed and sold in any size barrel desired, but if such barrel be smaller than the regular Standard Apple Barrel, then you must stamp on the outside or top of such barrel its actual capacity in terms of standard dry measure.
Some people prefer a smaller barrel than the apple barrel for Quinces and Pears, claiming the fruit carries better than in the full Standard Barrel. These people do not wish to stamp the capacity of the smaller barrel on the outside of it. They think it prejudices the sale of it; it also takes time and work. Therefore, e Special Pear And Quince Barrel Is Sought To Be Established Il'hich requires lo larking.
The policy of the Association on this Bill should be determined by the members. . It applies to our membership generally, no matter where situated. First-It sets a prece 'ent for other states to follow : SecondIt concerns you directly if you handle or buy New York Quinces and Pears. What Are Your Desires? Make Them Known To The Secretary At Once. Should I Special Pear And Quince Barrel Be Established?
We believe the State Department of Weights and Measures is oppose ! to the Bill. We imagine their position is that any man who wishes to use a smaller barrel ought to be willing, in the interests of a square deal, to state its capacity. If the smaller barrel is not essential to the proper packing of Pears and Quinces, this position is sound and a multiplicity of standards shoull not be created. The whole question therefore is this: IS THE STANDARD APPLE BARREL PRÓPER AND SUITABLE FOR PEARS AND OUINCES? ALSO IS IT ADVISABLE TO CREATE TOO MANY STANDARDS?. WHAT IS YOUR OPINION.