BOSTON BOARD OF TRADE. 
 
 REPORT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SELECT COMMITTEE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 BOARD OF TRADE, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE BOSTON AND 
 WORCESTER AND WESTERN RAILROADS. 
 
 AUGUST, 18 6 2. 
 
 BOSTON: 
 
 WRIGHT & POTTER, PRINTERS, 4 SPRING LANE. 
 
 1 8 6 2. * 
 

 r k f: t I ' 
 
 unoYiunviri' 
 
 i: hi Ml 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Office Board of Trade, ) 
 Boston, Oct. 6, 1862. ) 
 
 At a meeting of the Government of the Board this day, the fol¬ 
 lowing Report was read, accepted, and ordered to be printed under 
 the direction of the Committee. 
 
 Attest, LORENZO SABINE, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
t /> 
 
 rJ 
 
 <r^ 
 
 <£ 
 
 fl I I; / 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 Upon information, in February, 1862, that large quantities 
 of merchandise were detained at points West of Albany, in 
 consequence of inadequate means of carriage, the President 
 and Secretary of this Board addressed the Presidents of the 
 Boston and Worcester and Western Railroads on the subject; 
 and availed of the occasion to suggest to these Roads and to 
 others with which they are connected, the removal of one of 
 the principal obstacles to a share of the export trade to Eng¬ 
 land and the Continent, namely, the discrimination in favor 
 of New York and against Boston, in the rates of freight on 
 the various articles of food which are wanted abroad. The 
 replies which were received led to further correspondence, 
 and to several interviews* at our Rooms. At these meetings, 
 the existing relations between the two Roads which unite us 
 with Albany were freely discussed by their respective Presi¬ 
 dents, by the President, the Vice-Presidents, and other 
 members of the Government of this Board, with the result, 
 finally, of an agreement—signed on the 30tli of April—to 
 submit the vexed question of the division of the receipts for 
 freight and passengers of the “joint business ” of these Cor¬ 
 porations, to the judgment of your Committee, with the 
 powers of Referees. We accordingly met the parties, and 
 
 * The first was without previous arrangement, and the President of the 
 Boston and Worcester was not present. 
 
4 
 
 heard their allegations, proofs, and arguments: and—on the 
 10th of July—made an Award, which, by the terms of the 
 submission, may be terminated by either party on the 31st 
 of May of the very next year. Thus, the long controversy, 
 which has proved a disturbing element in the business of 
 Boston, is hushed for the moment only. 
 
 The impressions made upon us during the hearing, will 
 not soon be effaced. That, this Commonwealth, as a large 
 buyer of bread-stuffs and meats, and as the leading worker 
 of cotton, and wool, and leather, has a deep interest in every 
 question which concerns an interchange of commodities with 
 the West—we knew. So, too, we knew, that this city, as a 
 j3oint to receive the products of the soil and to distribute 
 the products of the factory and of the workshop, is the centre 
 of the whole North, and in commerce, the second in rank in 
 the Union. But, until we heard “ experts ” testify of curves 
 and cuts, of high grades and of low, of deep excavations of 
 earth and of rock, of mountain cataracts and freshets, of 
 bridges and of culverts, of the wear and tear of tracks, of 
 cars, and of engines; we had hardly appreciated the respon¬ 
 sibilities and discouragements of the noble men of Massachu¬ 
 setts of the last generation, who immolated health, who 
 suffered pecuniary loss, and who labored for years without 
 requital, to open lines of communication with the great 
 inland seas of America, which, of the aggregate length of 
 fifteen hundred miles, drain a domain of more than three 
 hundred thousand square miles, and, inhabited by a people 
 whose trade is now quite three hundred and fifty millions of 
 dollars annually: until we had listened for days, we were 
 but partially informed, we repeat, of the value of the services 
 and the sacrifices of these noble men. Nor, had we ever 
 measured the difficulties of judiciously using and of preserv- 
 
5 
 
 ing, the public works which they projected and completed. 
 Nor, had we ever heard from the lips of persons connected 
 with our great lines of Transport, long and minute accounts 
 of the fierce competition between different cities for suprem¬ 
 acy, and of the intense rivalry between railroads inland, and 
 of steamers on the lakes and sea-coasts; nor undertaken a 
 task which suggested the question, Whether—considered 
 merely as a mart—the ultimate rank of every American city 
 does not depend as much upon the extent, the speed, the 
 cheapness, and the safety of its means of transportation of 
 persons and of things, as upon geographical situation ? 
 
 Nay more : as, during the hearing, we gave attention to 
 the general evidence, as we mused upon the disagreements 
 in memory in stating the facts of past transactions, and upon 
 the intention or meaning of written contracts: as we exam¬ 
 ined the elaborate tables prepared and put into the case, to 
 show the results of different modes of dividing the receipts 
 for the “joint-business” of the Boston and Worcester and 
 Western Roads: as reference was made to previous arbitra¬ 
 tion and to applications to the General and to the Supreme 
 Court: and, as we gave ear to the arguments of counsel, we 
 became convinced that, Consolidation, as recommended, with 
 singular unanimity, by a Committee of the two Corporations, 
 in 1845, is the only measure which can ensure permanent 
 harmony, and give certain and adequate protection to the 
 distinctive business of Massachusetts and of Boston, already 
 mentioned. The reasons for this opinion, we proceed to state 
 as minutely as the limits of a Report will allow. Possibly, 
 we shall be met at the outset with the remark, that we 
 interfere with the concerns of individuals, that these roads 
 are under the direction of gentlemen of well known skill 
 and ability, who are competent to manage their affairs with- 
 
6 
 
 out counsel from your Committee or the Government of 
 this Board. With all deference, we submit that every sub¬ 
 ject discussed by this, or by any similar organization, is, in 
 some sense, open to the suggestion of intrusion upon the 
 rights of persons or of corporations. But, since the prin¬ 
 cipal aim of a Board of Trade or of a Chamber of Com¬ 
 merce is to ascertain, and to correct, evils in trade and 
 commerce, and to examine questions which facilitate or 
 retard intercourse between different sections of the country, 
 we respectfully submit that neither form of association 
 could be of service, and both would soon cease to exist, were 
 their inquiries to be limited to cases in which there should 
 be no intimation of intermeddling with some person or 
 with some thing. Besides, every one who is familiar with 
 the origin, privileges, and history of the Boston and Wor¬ 
 cester, and Western Roads, and recalls the pecuniary aid 
 afforded by the Commonwealth to the latter, will concede, 
 we think, that a plan which was once proposed by their 
 own representatives, may be revived now and by us, on the 
 ground stated in their Report before us, namely, that union 
 would promote the interests of these Corporations and of the 
 public. 
 
 The Boston and Worcester was chartered June 23d, 1831, 
 and opened to Worcester July 3d, 1835; and in 1843, the 
 Directors announced the completion of a double track for the 
 entire length, forty-four and three-fifths miles. The Western, 
 which is a little more than one hundred and fifty-six miles 
 long, with a double track of one hundred and eight miles,* 
 was chartered March 15, 1833 ; opened to Springfield in 
 November, 1839, and to the Hudson early in 1842. Thus 
 
 * Eight miles more will be completed the present year. 
 
7 
 
 the distance from Boston to Albany by this route, is nearly 
 two hundred and one miles. 
 
 As is said by the Committee of the two roads, in 1845,— 
 in the Report to which we have referred—“ The great West¬ 
 ern route, from Boston, the capital of New England, to 
 Albany, which is the gateway of the West, is so clearly 
 marked as a single , distinct and entire route , that it must 
 strike every one, as the most natural and proper course, that 
 the great channel of railroad communication between these 
 two prominent points, should be one* likewise.” 
 
 The questions at issue between the two Corporations, are 
 thus stated in the submission under which we made our 
 Award. 
 
 “ Whereas, said Corporations differ in opinion as to the proportion 
 each is fairly entitled to receive of the receipts from passengers and 
 merchandise passing over the whole or parts of both roads, which 
 differences are substantially as follows, to wit: The Boston and 
 Worcester Railroad claim that a fair and equitable basis of settle¬ 
 ment is, First, a just and specific allowance or sum per ton should be 
 paid out of the joint freight receipts to each road, to cover expenses 
 of loading, unloading, cooperage and collection charges. Second, 
 That all joint receipts for passengers and freight on each passenger 
 and each ton of freight to and from each station, should be divided 
 in proportion to the distance*each is transported by each road. 
 
 “On the other hand, the Western Railroad claim that the higher 
 relative cost of their road, higher grades, ferry at Albany, and 
 advances on freight, and consequent increased expenses of operating 
 the road, entitles them to an allowance which will more than offset 
 the claim for any allowance for handling freight, &c., on the part of 
 
 * The Italics are the Committee’s. 
 
8 
 
 the Worcester Road. Second, that they are entitled to a higher rate 
 per ton and per mile per passenger for all freight and passengers 
 passing over both roads, or portions of both roads, than the Worces¬ 
 ter Road is entitled to. Now therefore, without any intent on the 
 part of either to admit the correctness of the claims made by the 
 other, said Corporations hereby agree to submit said differences to 
 Charles O. Whitmore, of Boston, George C. Richardson, of Cam¬ 
 bridge, Nathaniel Harris, of Boston, James H. Beal, of Boston, and 
 Joseph S. Fay, of said Boston, a Committee of the Board of Trade 
 of Boston, &e. 
 
 The “ differences ” here recited, are of long standing. As 
 early as February, 1845,* the Directors of the Western made 
 a detailed statement to the stockholders of that road, of “ the 
 facts connected with the controversy ” which had already 
 occurred, and which had caused them to petition for legis¬ 
 lative interposition. They averred that the Boston and 
 Worcester, claimed—for the joint business—“ as a general 
 principle,” a “ pro rata per mile” division, or, “ according 
 to the distance the passengers and merchandise were carried 
 on each road:” and, that the exceptions to the rigid use of 
 this rule were, payment to each Corporation of a specific sum 
 for certain station expenses,—before division,—on freight, 
 and slight favor to the 'Western, on passenger fare. They 
 stated that, on the other hand, they demanded the IVorcester 
 to do all the business to and from the 'Western, at less prices 
 than the Western charged for the same business, and less 
 than the IVorcester’s own local rates. And first, because, 
 “ Such has manifestly been the design of the Legislature, 
 not only in the provisions of the Worcester charter, but in 
 all their previous and subsequent enactments now in force 
 
 ♦Tenth Annual Heport of Western, February, 1845. 
 
9 
 
 on the subject of railroads.” Second, because the “ Western 
 has been, and always will be, of vast advantage to the Wor¬ 
 cester,” in opening “ an entirely new and almost illimitable 
 extent of custom for transportation.” Third, because the 
 Western “is a large, wholesale customer to the Worcester.” 
 Fourth, because the high mountain grades of the Western, 
 require great power and costly engines, and do not allow the 
 carriage of as heavy loads as can be transported over the 
 Worcester: because of the cost of maintaining a ferry-boat 
 and ferry at Greenbush,;—of the expensive bridge across the 
 Connecticut, and other wooden structures to keep in repair, 
 and many stone ■ bridges exposed to particular perils—and 
 the peculiar exposure to heavy snows, and the consequent 
 delay of trains in a sparsely settled or uninhabited country. 
 
 At this early day, too, the Directors of the Western spoke 
 of “ one other principle of controversy,” from which,—as 
 we understand their remarks—it seems they claimed—as 
 “vitally important”—the sole right to make, and at plea¬ 
 sure to alter a tariff for both Roads, and to allow the Wor- 
 
 * 
 
 cester a fixed sum for each passenger and each ton of 
 merchandise, of the joint business, without stipulation to 
 that Road for increased recompense, in case of the adoption 
 of higher rates. 
 
 After the failure of long and repeated negotiations “ to 
 effect a compromise,” an Act* was passed to authorize the 
 Western to enter upon and use the Boston and Worcester, 
 or any part thereof, paying therefor such rate of toll or com¬ 
 pensation as the Legislature may, from time to time, pre¬ 
 scribe, or that may be fixed under any general law of this 
 Commonwealth, Ac. 
 
 * March 25, 1845. 
 
 2 
 
10 
 
 The attempt to unite the two Corporations, which we have 
 mentioned, soon followed. Committees of both reported* * * § 
 unanimously in favor of union ; but the Stockholders of the 
 Boston and Worcester indefinitely postponed the subject, 
 “ without reference to the terms proposed.” f 
 
 We have not room for details, and can only say—in a 
 word—that the current of events against the Western, was 
 strong and deep. It is remarked in a communication to the 
 Stockholders of that Road which Addison Gilmore prepared 
 for publication, and which was found among his papers after 
 his death, that at the time he was elected President, Jan¬ 
 uary, 1846, “A vexatious suit with the Boston and Worces¬ 
 ter Road was pending before the Supreme Court, and many 
 other difficult questions remained unadjusted. The stock 
 was selling at eighty-five per cent, in the market, that of the 
 Boston and Worcester Road at fourteen per cent, advance, 
 the Boston and Maine at eleven per cent, advance, the 
 Concord at thirty-four and one-half per cent, advance, the 
 Fitchburg at twenty per cent, advance, and the Old Colony 
 at six per cent, advance. J 
 
 But, the “ Contract of 1846,” § of which so much was 
 said at the hearing, and to which we find so constant refer¬ 
 ence in the mass of printed and written matter upon our 
 table, hushed, as if by a magic charm, the unfortunate 
 differences between these Corporations. For the purposes 
 
 * Their Report is dated December 17, 1845, and is signed on the part of 
 the Boston and Worcester, by Jona. Chapman, S. Bartlett, John Hathaway, 
 and Moses William; and on the part of the Western, by Josiali Quincy, 
 Jr., Addison Gilmore, H. Andrews, and Joseph Whitney. 
 
 t Eleventh Annual Report Western, February, 184G. 
 
 + Sixteenth Annual Report Western, January, 1851. 
 
 § Nathan Hale was President of the Boston and W orcester, and Addis-on 
 Gilmore of the Western, at this time. 
 
11 
 
 of this Report, several years may be passed at a single 
 bound of the pen ; and especially, since in another con¬ 
 nection, we shall be compelled to relate particulars which, 
 by the plan we have adopted, cannot be embraced here. In 
 1858 the Directors of the Western spoke thus, — and we 
 prefer to use their own words— 
 
 “ In the early history of this Corporation there was much negoti¬ 
 ation with the Boston and Worcester Railroad Corporation in relation 
 to the manner of doing the joint business, and of the proportion that 
 should be received by each. This negotiation resulted in a contract 
 based upon the principle of giving to the Western, in consideration 
 of its higher grades, and higher relative cost, a higher rate of hires 
 and freights, than was given to the Boston and 11 orcester Railroad 
 Corporation. This contract underwent various renewals and modifi¬ 
 cations, but the principle remained the same. Under the contract a 
 specific rate was given for passengers. This had not been changed 
 by any of the modifications of the contract, and was more than just 
 to the Boston and Worcester Corporation; as under it, it appeared 
 that notwithstanding the Western made much less mileage ot joint 
 trains according to the length of each road, the Boston and 11 orces¬ 
 ter got a much greater sum per mile run of joint passenger trains 
 than was received by the Western. The sum thus given to the 
 Boston and Worcester from joint passengers was more than fifty per 
 cent, per mile of road than was received by the Western from the 
 same source. In the division of joint freights all specific rates had 
 been ignored, and a sliding scale adopted (as we think through inad- 
 vertance, and not in accordance with the spirit of the contract) 
 which was actually giving to the Boston and Worcester from twelve 
 to fifteen per cent, more of the receipts from the joint freight busi¬ 
 ness than was received by this Corporation, having reference to the 
 work performed by each in doing the business. Under these circum¬ 
 stances, we in November, 18o5, notified the Boston and 11 orcestoi 
 
12 
 
 Corporation of our wish to terminate the contract, which in terms 
 was to expire after six months’ notice from either party. Then find¬ 
 ing it impossible to agree on the terms of a new contract, we in May 
 last applied to the Supreme Court for the appointment of Commis¬ 
 sioners under the Statutes of 1845 and 1857, to fix and determine 
 the reasonable compensation to be paid by us to the Boston and 
 Worcester Railroad Corporation for drawing over their road our 
 passengers, merchandise and cars, and for providing suitable depot 
 accommodations therefor. The hearing before the Commissioners 
 thus appointed has been had, but their award has not yet been pub¬ 
 lished. We think we may reasonably anticipate that they will fix 
 a tariff of prices to be paid by us, which will give us a larger income 
 than we received under the last contract from business passing over 
 tills Road to and from the Boston and Worcester Road.” * 
 
 In 1860, the Directors of the Western announced that 
 there had been no fixed rule for the division of the receipts 
 of the joint business, since December, 1856 : that they were 
 asked to pay almost as many prices for the transportation per 
 ton of the different classes of freight over the Boston and 
 Worcester, as there are stations on the Western, and, that 
 thus far, this claim had prevented an adjustment of the unset¬ 
 tled accounts between the two Corporations. They stated, 
 also, that, “ as a compromise measure,” they had offered to 
 divide the gross joint freight money “ pro rata, according to 
 
 the number of tons carried one mile bv each” Road. And, 
 
 * • 
 
 to illustrate the points of difference, they put the question— 
 “ Why should the manufacturer at Ware pay more money for 
 carrying his cotton from Boston to Worcester, if consigned to 
 West Brookfield, than if consigned to him at Palmer; or why 
 should the manufacturer at Palmer pay more freight for the 
 
 * Twenty-third Annual Report Western, January, 1858. 
 
13 
 
 same articles over the Boston and Worcester Road, if con¬ 
 signed to Palmer, than if marked to Indian Orchard.”* 
 
 The topics discussed in the Report of January, 1861, 
 belong, principally, elsewhere. Three things, however, may 
 be properly noticed here. First, for the purpose of settling 
 the past, an offer by the Western to pay the Boston and 
 Worcester a bonus of twenty-five thousand dollars to termi¬ 
 nate the Brooks, Hinckley and Higginson Award, and sub¬ 
 mit the whole matter in dispute to impartial men: second, 
 the proposal of the same, to revive the contract which expired 
 May 31, 1856, and refer the question of its true construction 
 to the umpirage of three disinterested persons selected by the 
 parties, or appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
 Court: and third, the following significant sentence : “We 
 have heretofore suggested that a consolidation of the roads 
 on an equitable basis would at once remove these sources of 
 differences so annoying, so interminable, and which bid fair to 
 exist at all the numerous points at which the interest of the 
 two Roads come in contact. As another means of relief, it 
 remains further to suggest that the exclusive privilege now 
 enjoyed by the charter of the Worcester Company, between 
 Worcester and Boston, expires on the 23d day of June next, 
 and it will then be in our power with the proper legislative 
 sanction, to extend our Road by a line wholly independent, 
 or by connection with other roads to Boston.” f 
 
 Our digest, to this point, is made principally from the doc¬ 
 uments put in by the Western. We designed, at the outset, to 
 weave or intermix our materials in a way to present a chro¬ 
 nological synopsis of the case at a single view: but, after two 
 days’ lost labor, we were led to conclude that such a course 
 
 * Twenty-fifth Annual Report Western, 1860. 
 
 f Twenty-sixth Annual Report Western, 1861. 
 
14 
 
 was impracticable within the time at our disposal, or, if other¬ 
 wise, would still expose us to imputations of unfairness; and 
 we accordingly allow the parties to be heard in turn. Fortu¬ 
 nately, as will soon be seen, this change of plan involves very 
 little repetition. With this explanation, we pass to the 
 Reports and papers submitted to us by the Boston and 
 Worcester. 
 
 The first arrangement was made in 1840, when we find 
 the through freight charged at rates lower than the local, for 
 the reason, that goods once loaded in the cars, and carried 
 to the summit level of the line, a distance of sixty or seventy 
 miles, might be carried to the termination of the line, at as 
 little cost, as to any of the intervening stations. This rule 
 seems to have been agreed to without difficulty ; and has 
 existed ever since. 
 
 In 1842, a reduction was reluctantly made in the rate of 
 transporting freight, at the earnest solicitation of the Direc¬ 
 tors of the Western, who advocated also reduced fare to 
 passengers. The tariff then adopted for the joint, was lower 
 than that of the Boston and Worcester on its own, business; 
 and the reasons for yielding to the Western, are stated at some 
 length in two Annual Reports.* In fixing a rule for dividing 
 the freight-money, there seems to have been no difference of 
 opinion ; each assenting to allow the other twenty cents per 
 ton, for receiving, storing, loading, and forwarding, goods— 
 clerical expenses included—and a like sum per ton, for 
 unloading, delivering, storing, and collecting freight-bills; 
 and this compensation made, a division of the balance pro 
 rata, or in exact proportion to the distance carried by each 
 Road. 
 
 ♦Eleventh and Twelfth, years 1842 and 1843. 
 
15 
 
 We come next to the beginning of the present controversy. 
 In addition to the continued discussions between the two 
 Boards as concerned the rates of fare and freight, the West¬ 
 ern, in December, 1843,* proposed a new rule for dividing 
 both passenger and freight receipts of the joint business, 
 which the Boston and Worcester deemed entirely inconsistent 
 with the relative rights of the two Corporations, and especi¬ 
 ally with its own, in law and equity, and which, of conse¬ 
 quence, after a careful examination, was declined. The 
 Western appealed to the Legislature, and the parties appeared 
 in due time before a Committee of that body, the one to 
 urge, the other to oppose, interposition. Proceedings, 
 however, were suspended ; and by agreement of the Directors 
 of the two Corporations, the matter in dispute was referred 
 to three distinguished legal gentlemen,! with power to make 
 an Award for the year 1844, and until three months’ notice 
 by either party of dissatisfaction therewith. At the hearing 
 before the Referees, the counsel of the Boston and Worcester 
 put in a paper,! in which they denied the right of the 
 Legislature, and consequently of the Referees themselves, to 
 establish the rates which should be paid for the use of that 
 Road by the Western; but nevertheless, for certain consid¬ 
 erations therein recited, they waived the objections raised, 
 and consented to proceed and finish the case. The Award, 
 which was made May 21, 1844, was very unsatisfactory to 
 the Directors of the Boston and Worcester, both in its general 
 principles, and in the rule of division it established. On 
 flour, that Road was to receive one-fourtli of the existing 
 tariff from Albany to Boston, or nine cents the barrel on 
 
 * Thirteenth Annual Report Boston and Worcester, year 1844. 
 
 f Linus Child, John M. Williams and Charles H. Warren. 
 
 X Daniel Webster, and Benjamin R. Curtis. 
 
16 
 
 “ through,” and pro rata on “ way,” with the same proper 
 tion on any addition to the rate ; while, on all other 
 merchandise the Western was to pay it two and seven-eighths 
 cents per ton for each mile carried, with a comparative 
 increase on a higher tariff, but without allowance for loading, 
 unloading, and other expenses, as under the arrangement in 
 1842. In the matter of joint passengers, the Award provided 
 that the Western should allow two and a half cents per mile 
 on first class, and two-thirds of that sum on second class; 
 but yet, in case the Boston and Worcester should thereafter 
 transport either class at rates lower than these, it should 
 make a corresponding reduction to the Western. The fare 
 on the latter, was already higher than on the parent Road, 
 yet, by this division of joint passenger receipts, the average 
 rate of compensation per mile, on first class, was fixed at 
 fifty per cent, less to the Boston and Worcester than to the 
 Western, for the last named, was actually to be paid from 
 the earnings of the other, thirty-eight cents, on first class, 
 for each person transported. It is to be said, however, that 
 the Boston and Worcester had previously (except for a short 
 period), and voluntarily conceded about two-thirds of this 
 disproportion, not, as the Directors averred at the time, that 
 the Western could of right claim such or any other conces¬ 
 sion, “ but on the ground, that from the relative situation 
 and circumstances of the two Roads, the oldest might be 
 justly required to carry the joint passengers at a lower rate 
 per mile than the youngest.* The Directors say further, 
 that “ The result of our exertions for the accommodation of 
 the freight business of the Western Road under this Award 
 is, that with an increased capital of more than a million of 
 
 * Thirteenth Annual Report Boston and "Worcester, year 1844. 
 
17 
 
 dollars, a great part of which was demanded chiefly for the 
 accommodations of the Western freight, the earnings of our 
 local freight are reduced by the amount of $43,000 ; and 
 while our whole freight is increased to the immense amount 
 of ninety thousand tons, we are required to transport the 
 whole increase, for a compensation less than the actual cost.” 
 
 In January, 1845, the Boston and Worcester gave notice 
 of intention to terminate the Award at the earliest period its 
 conditions would allow; and soon after, submitted to the 
 Western a proposition for new terms of agreement. From 
 this paper, we extract the three articles pertinent to our 
 purpose. Thus, 
 
 1. Each Corporation shall be entitled to the whole income 
 earned upon its own Road. 
 
 2. The rates of fare and freight, for the joint business of 
 the two Roads, shall he determined by mutual agreement 
 between the two Boards of Directors. 
 
 3. In determining the rates of fare and freight for the joint 
 business of the two Roads, it shall be first ascertained what 
 difference between their respective rates will afford to each 
 Corporation an equal net profit per mile, on each passenger, 
 and each ton of freight transported (over the whole or any 
 part of both Roads,) taking into consideration the annual 
 charges and the annual interest on the cost of each, with its 
 appurtenances, and averaging these on the whole business of 
 the respective Roads. The rates established shall be such, as 
 with a just allowance for this difference of annual expenses 
 and interest, will give to each Road an equal net profit per 
 mile on each passenger of the same class, and eacli ton of 
 freight of the same class. 
 
 The Western not only declined this overture, but peti¬ 
 tioned the Legislature for authority to use the Boston and 
 
 3 
 
18 
 
 Worcester, at a compensation to be fixed by law. One of the 
 results was, the passage of an Act to “ Regulate the use of 
 Railroads,” under a provision of which, the Western applied 
 to the Supreme Court for the appointment of Commissioners 
 to determine the rates it should pay for the drawing of pas¬ 
 sengers, merchandise and cars over the connecting Road. 
 The two Corporations,* however, while this application was 
 pending, adjusted all matters of controversy between them ; 
 and agreed upon terms for the regulation of their joint busi¬ 
 ness for a period of three years, “ on a principle which 
 recognized the existence of equal powers and rights under 
 their respective charters,” and by a rule of division of receipts, 
 u mutually satisfactory.” And yet, this very u Contract of 
 1846,” so acceptable at the moment, introduced disturbing 
 elements of a nature so grave, as—in our judgment—to 
 render success in any attempt to effect entire harmony, well 
 nigh hopeless. 
 
 We quote such parts of this famous document as are neces¬ 
 sary to show the relations between the two Corporations 
 sixteen years ago, and to an understanding of the material 
 points at issue now :— 
 
 “ Article 1. That in consideration of the higher relative cost 
 of the Western Railroad, as well as the expense of transportation 
 upon it, in proportion to the amount of its business, it is agreed 
 between the parties aforesaid, that the said Western Corporation 
 shall receive a larger proportion of the fare from joint passengers, 
 than a pro rata division per mile, as follows, viz.:— 
 
 “ Provided , the said Western Railroad shall so reduce its fare on 
 the through passengers, that the rate from Boston to Albany shall 
 be live dollars, the full proportion of which for the forty-four miles 
 
 * Keport Boston and Worcester, June 1, 184G. 
 
19 
 
 of the Worcester Road would be one dollar and ten cents, it is 
 agreed that ten cents shall be deducted from the said proportion, 
 and added tc the proportion of the Western Road, so that the said 
 Worcester Company shall receive one dollar, and the Western Road 
 four dollars of the said through fare, and the mode of collecting said 
 through fares, as well as the joint way fares shall be the same as 
 has been practiced heretofore, by the sale of the tickets of the sev¬ 
 eral roads, by the agents of each, at their respective local rates, and 
 dividing and accounting for the proceeds in the manner herein pro¬ 
 vided for. Second class passengers are to be charged at two-thirds 
 the rates of those of the first class, the proceeds in all cases to be 
 accounted for in the same proportion. 
 
 “ Article 2. In case it shall become necessary or expedient for 
 encouraging the through travel, to establish an extra through train 
 to run at lower rates of fare than those above stipulated to be estab¬ 
 lished by mutual agreement, the parties hereto engage to consent to 
 the same, and the proceeds of the fare so established shall be divided 
 on the same principle of deducting ten cents from the pro rata share 
 of the Boston and Worcester Road and adding it to that of the 
 Western. Such way passengers as may be carried in the said extra 
 train shall pay the regular rates of fare, unless a different rate shall 
 be established by mutual consent. 
 
 “Article 3. The Boston and Worcester Corporation agrees 
 that the Western Corporation shall be permitted to charge the joint 
 passengers going to or from the way stations on their road at a 
 higher rate than the above, but not exceeding three cents a mile, 
 and that they will claim on this account no more than one dollar for 
 the whole length of their road, and in the same proportion for parts 
 of it. 
 
 “ Article 9. In regard to the income derived from the trans¬ 
 portation of merchandise, in consideration of the extraordinary 
 expenses represented by the said Western Corporation to be incurred 
 by them in hoisting and lowering goods between the railroad and 
 canal boats at Greenbusli, and of collecting considerable portions of 
 
20 
 
 the freight in small parcels at a large number of way stations, and 
 of other stipulations in this agreement, the Boston and 'Worcester 
 Corporation agree that the expenses of loading, unloading, clerk hire 
 and other depot expenses incurred in the management of the joint 
 business on their part of the line, shall be set off against the like 
 expenses, including the said extraordinary charges incurred by the 
 Western Corporation on their part of the line, and the gross receipts 
 of income shall be divided between the said Corporations in the man¬ 
 ner specified in the next article instead of the said expenses of load¬ 
 ing, unloading, &e., being made a charge on the gross receipts before 
 division, as has been claimed by the Boston and Worcester Corpo¬ 
 ration heretofore. 
 
 “Article 10. In consideration of the high grades on a part of 
 the Western Boad, and the consequent large amount of locomotive 
 power required in passing them, and also of the greater wear and 
 hazard of injury to the cars, it is further agreed that the receipts 
 from the transportation of all joint merchandise shall be divided 
 between the two Corporations pro rata, according to the number of 
 miles which each parcel is transported, with this exception, that 
 after ascertaining the said pro rata division, there shall be deducted 
 from the proportion of the Boston and Worcester Corporation, an 
 amount equal to twelve cents per ton, for every ton transported to 
 or from places west of Springfield, and the said amount shall be 
 added to the pro rata proportion of the Western Road. 
 
 “Article 11. It is agreed that either party may make special 
 bargains for the transportation of large parcels of freight at rates 
 varying from the regular rates in particular cases, on terms which 
 they may think advantageous to the interest of the two Corpora¬ 
 tions, and the division of receipts therefrom shall be made in accord¬ 
 ance with the terms above indicated. 
 
 “Article 12. In consideration of the expenses incurred by the 
 Western Corporation in supporting a ferry-boat between Grcenbush 
 and Albany, the Boston and Worcester Corporation agree to pay the 
 
21 
 
 Western Corporation two thousand dollars per annum towards 
 defraying this expense.” 
 
 The contract of 1846 was renewed in February, 1849, at 
 which time the 12th Article was declared “ null and void, 
 without substitute:” and the third was “to be so altered as 
 to read that the joint fare between Boston and Springfield 
 shall be reduced to two dollars and fifty cents, and between 
 Boston and Albany shall be fixed at five dollars, and that the 
 Western Road may establish such joint fare as they may 
 judge expedient for passengers going to or from way stations 
 west of Connecticut River, and a higher rate than the price 
 between Boston and Springfield, according to distance, for 
 passengers going to or from way stations east of Springfield, 
 and that the full proportion of the joint fares so established 
 going to the Worcester Corporation shall be one dollar for 
 the whole length of their road, and in the same proportion, 
 according to distance, for parts of it.” 
 
 These were the only changes in the articles above cited. 
 In November, 1853, there was a second renewal, with the 
 modifications of the seven articles, that “ the ninth and tenth 
 articles of the contract of 1846, and continued without alter¬ 
 ation in the contract of 1849, shall be expunged, and instead 
 thereof the following rule of division shall be substituted, 
 viz.: — The joint receipts for the transportation of freight 
 shall be divided between the respective Corporations, accord¬ 
 ing to the distance carried, without allowance to either 
 Company for depot charges.” 
 
 The last arrangement was to continue in force until June 
 1, 1856, “and until six months’ notice, in writing, be given 
 by either party to terminate it, after that date.” Such, then, 
 were the rules which regulated the joint business of the two 
 
22 
 
 Corporations, for more than ten years; but, in November, 
 1855, both moved to put an end to them. Yet, to allow the 
 President of the Boston and Worcester* — the late Hon. 
 Thomas Hopkinson—to go abroad with a view to the resto¬ 
 ration of his health, the repudiated mode of division was 
 provisionally continued from June to December, 185G. The 
 two Boards failing to adjust their differences of opinion, in 
 several conferences held for the purpose, the Boston and 
 Worcester proposed “ to submit the matter of an equitable 
 division of the joint receipts to intelligent, fair and impartial 
 men, to be mutually agreed upon by the parties.” This, the 
 Western declined. A second offer to appear before referees 
 
 followed, and was also declined. Still again, a proposal was 
 
 \ , 
 
 made to refer to gentlemen of the two Boards, of whom the 
 Western was to have a majority. To this, the last mentioned 
 Road refused assent; nor did it accept the overture to join 
 in application to the Supreme Court for an adjustment under 
 the laws of the Commonwealth. At last, however, both 
 petitioned the Court, separately: the Western, for Commis¬ 
 sioners “ to fix the rate at which passengers and freight 
 should be carried, and depot accommodations furnished;” 
 and the Boston and Worcester, for Commissioners “to deter¬ 
 mine these and all other questions at issue.” On the 2d of 
 November, the Court, with the consent of the parties, desig¬ 
 nated three gentlemen,! who made an Award, which was 
 opened and filed on the 24th of March, 1858, which the 
 Boston and Worcester moved the Court to affirm and accept, 
 but which, the Western moved to wholly set aside, or to 
 recommit for revision and correction. The case was argued 
 and decided at the law term of the Supreme Court, Novcm- 
 
 * Twenty-eighth Annual Report Boston and Worcester, November, 1857. 
 
 f John W. Brooks, Isaac Hinckley, and Waldo Iligginson. 
 
23 
 
 ber, 1859, and the judgment of the Commissioners sustained 
 in an elaborate opinion, save as relates to the rights, duties 
 and obligations of the parties anterior to the beginning of 
 proceedings, not embraced in the submission.* 
 
 This Award—to state the result in a word—gave the West¬ 
 ern an excess over pro rata, on every class of freight, at 
 thirty of the thirty-five stations between Worcester and 
 Albany; and an excess over pro rata at all of them, on first 
 class passengers, and at thirty-one of them, on second class. 
 Or, inversely, the Boston and Worcester was allowed more 
 than a pro rata share of the joint receipts at five places, on 
 freight, and at four places on second class passengers, f 
 On the 19th of February, 1860, an order was adopted in 
 the General Court, at the instance of the Western, to inquire 
 into the “ expediency of further legislation in relation to the 
 powers of Commissioners, appointed under the laws relating 
 to connecting railroads: ” and, a few days after, that Corpo¬ 
 ration applied to the Supreme Court for a second Commission 
 to consider its differences with the Boston and Worcester. 
 As concerns the order, a hearing was had before the Com¬ 
 mittee on Railways and Canals, at which the gentlemen who 
 made the Award in March, 1858, and the Presidents of the 
 two Roads, were present. Mr. Brooks gave a minute account 
 of the course pursued by himself and his fellow Commission¬ 
 ers, with “ a perfect exposition of the facts proved before them, 
 and of the careful consideration they gave to every matter 
 affecting the joint business,”J and interests of the parties; 
 and made such answers to questions put to him as to show, 
 “ that he was a perfect master of the whole subject, and was 
 
 * Thirtieth Annual Report Boston and Worcester, 1859. 
 
 f Tables and Minority Report Committee on Railways and Canals, 18G0. 
 
 % Minority Report of the Committee on Railways and Canals, 18G0. 
 
24 
 
 entirely familiar with every fact, circumstance and principle 
 touching the points of the case.’’ And he “assured the 
 Committee that he and his associates had spared no pains to 
 make a just Award, and all his reflections since had confirmed 
 him in the opinion that their decision was correct and right.” 
 Messrs. Higginson and Hinckley, on being called, stated that 
 thev had heard Mr. Brooks with care, that “ thev fully con- 
 curred with him in all that he had testified and said, and 
 that they had nothing further to add by way of explanation 
 or qualification.”* 
 
 “ After this testimony of the Commissioners had been 
 given, the President of the Western Railroad proceeded to 
 state his objections to said Award, and presented an array of 
 figures and statistics which he explained with much fulness. 
 His statements and testimony were given at much length. 
 His object was to show that the joint receipts should be 
 divided, or rather that each party should receive a certain 
 reasonable compensation for its share of labor in carrying on 
 and transacting the joint business, according to a certain 
 fixed rule to be prescribed by the Legislature. 
 
 “The President of the Worcester Company then gave his 
 testimony and proceeded to make a statement at somewhat 
 greater length than the gentleman who preceded him. He 
 also presented a mass of facts and of figures and statistics 
 on his part. His object was to show that said Award was 
 not only not unjust to the Western Road, but was more 
 favorable to that Corporation than it ought to have been, and 
 also to prove that it would be fatal to the best interests of 
 both said two great roads to have such an unbending and 
 fixed rule adopted as was proposed. 
 
 * Minority Report of the Committee on Railways and Canals, 1800. 
 
<c He insisted that the great purpose of the Legislature had 
 been to secure the appointment of able, experienced and 
 practical men for Commissioners, and then to leave it to such 
 men as Commissioners to prescribe such a rule for the 
 division of the joint receipts as would be applicable to the 
 character of the roads and the relations of the parties before 
 them, and would secure such a division as would be just and 
 reasonable between the parties.”* 
 
 The Committee reported a bill, which, after discussion, 
 passed the House by a considerable majority, but which the 
 Senate referred to the next General Court. This bill 
 provided that Commissioners appointed under existing laws, 
 to determine the relations between connecting roads, should 
 fix one rate of compensation for carrying freight and 
 passengers, without regard to the points, on the paying road, 
 where either were received or delivered. This provision 
 was strenuously opposed by the Boston and Worcester, 
 but by the Western it was deemed merely declaratory.! 
 
 With the mention now, of three contracts between the two 
 Corporations, we conclude this part of our Report. The 
 first is dated August 23, 1860, and provides for the adjust¬ 
 ment of accounts from June 1, 1856, to December 1, 1860, 
 as follows:—for two and one quarter years, according to the 
 contract of November 1, 1853, as interpreted by F. B. 
 Crowninsliield, Esq., President of the Boston and Lowell 
 Railroad, acting as Referee ;! and for the remaining and like 
 
 * Minority Report of Committee on Railways and Canals, March 27, 1SG0. 
 f Twenty-sixth Annual Report Western, 1S61; and “Communication” 
 of Boston and Worcester, 1860. 
 
 X We do not find the Award of Mr. Crowninsliield among the papers put 
 in by either party. The Directors of the Boston and AVorcester in their 
 31st Annual Report, November, 1860, remark that, his “ construction of 
 the contract of 1853, was that it provided for a division pro rata per ton 
 per mile, as claimed by us.” 
 
 4 
 
26 
 
 period, in accordance with the Award of Messrs. Brooks. 
 Hinckley, and Higginson. The second, executed Xoveml*er 
 27.1860, states the claims of each party with brevity, recites 
 that, “ in a spirit of compromise, and to avoid if possible 
 the vexations and expense of an appeal for judicial or 
 legislative interference,” and, “with the distinct under¬ 
 standing that in future differences that mav arise between 
 the two Roads, neither one of them shall make use of the 
 concessions now made to the prejudice of the other;” and 
 provides that, for the six months immediately following 
 November 80. 1860, accounts shall be settled monthly, 
 according to the Award of Messrs. Brooks, Hinckley, and 
 Higginson, and that the Boston and Worcester shall pay the 
 Western, the sum of one thousand dollars at each and every 
 such settlement. The last—dated May 30, 1861—makes 
 pertinent reference to the disturbed condition of the country 
 and the necessity of unity of action; again deprecates an 
 appeal to public tribunals, again guards against prejudice to 
 either Road in consequence of repeating the “ concessions ” ; 
 and stipulates first, for the continuance of the joint business 
 for one year—to May 31,1862—under the terms of certain 
 enumerated sections of the Brooks. Hinckley, and Higginson 
 Award, and second, for a subsidy* to the Western by the 
 Boston and Worcester, of twelve thousand dollars, in equal 
 monthly payments.! 
 
 Such is the mere outline of this controversy; such, the 
 past efforts to reconcile the conflicting opinions of able and 
 honorable men; such the endeavors to devise measures to 
 hold two large, highly useful, and prosperous Corporations 
 in amity. As merchants and sufferers, as the representatives 
 
 * Subsidy is the Boston and Worcester’s own word. 
 
 t Reports Boston and Worcester, l*+JO and 1061, “Communication," lo6U. 
 
27 
 
 of merchants and'sufferers, we cannot, but express the hope 
 —the earnest hope—that there will be no more appeals to 
 Referees or to Commissioners, but union, early, perpetual 
 UNION, ON TERMS OF EXACT JUSTICE. 
 
 “ By this marriage , 
 
 All little jealousies, which now seem great, 
 
 And all great fears, which now import their dangers , 
 
 Would then be nothing; truths would be tales , 
 
 Where now half tales be truths” 
 
 ****** u p arc [ on what I have spoke ; 
 
 For His a studied , not a present thought; 
 
 By duty ruminated ” 
 
 Thus far, we have spoken in general terms ; to under¬ 
 stand the case thoroughly, however, particular facts and 
 exact figures are indispensable, and these we now proceed to 
 record. 
 
 Our duty in this relation has caused us no little anxiety, 
 for, on the one hand, we are expected to make a brief 
 Report, and on the other, such a digest of all the points of 
 difference, as shall show unconditional impartiality. After 
 much reflection, we conclude to insert such parts of the 
 documents put in at the hearing before us, as are directly 
 pertinent to the issue, without a word of comment. 
 First as to costs and grades. The Western avers that, 
 “ in the early history of this Corporation there was much 
 negotiation with the Boston and Worcester Railroad Corpo¬ 
 ration in relation to the manner of doing the joint business, 
 and of the proportion that should be received by each. 
 This negotiation resulted in a contract based upon the 
 principle of giving to the Western, in consideration of its 
 higher grades, and higher relative cost, a higher rate of 
 
28 
 
 fares and freights, than was given to the Boston and 
 Worcester Railroad Corporation. This contract underwent 
 various renewals and modifications, hut the principle 
 remained the same.”* 
 
 The Boston and Worcester replies, that u if its cost was 
 then relatively higher, so as to entitle that Corporation to a 
 higher rate, that consideration is clearly now in favor of this 
 Corporation, for by the reports of the two Corporations to 
 the Legislature, it appears that the cost of the Boston and 
 Worcester main road per mile, including buildings, was 
 $82,068, while the cost of the Western Railroad per mile, 
 including buildings, was $38,618. 
 
 “ As to higher relative grades—the maximum grade of the 
 Western Railroad is 83 feet for 1J miles; that of the Boston 
 and Worcester 37 feet for 1,100 feet; but the total rise and 
 fall in the Western Railroad, as it is stated in their report, is 
 2,085 feet, making an average rise and fall per mile of 13^ 
 feet; while the total rise and fall in the Boston and Worces¬ 
 ter Railroad is 714 feet, making an average rise and fall per 
 mile of 16 ^ feet.”f 
 
 Second, as to the division of the receipts from the joint 
 business. The Western declares that the framers of the 
 “ Contract of 1846,” designed to divide such receipts “ by a 
 single rule between the respective Corporations pro rata, 
 according to the distance carried, and not that they 
 intended to divide the receipts for each ton of freight pro 
 rata per mile to each station, by a rule that never lias and 
 never can fail to give the Boston and Worcester Corporation 
 from fifteen to twenty-five per cent, higher rate .than it gives 
 the Western. The contracts referred to, each and all of 
 
 * Twenty-third Annual Keport Western, January, 1858. 
 f Twenty-ninth Annual Keport Boston ami Worcester, November, 1858. 
 
29 
 
 them declared that in consideration of higher grades, <fcc., 
 <fcc., the Western shall be entitled to higher rates of fare and 
 freights than the Boston and Worcester, and we say, 
 that neither the gentlemen signing those contracts for the 
 Western Koad, or the Boston and Worcester Road, intended 
 to adopt or perpetuate a rule for dividing freight receipts 
 between these two Corporations, that would give to either 
 party a rate 25 per cent, greater than it gave to the other. 
 Yet this is, as we have shown, the operation of the rule 
 under which we have been compelled to work, until we have 
 already contributed from our fair proportion of the income, 
 more than a quarter of a million dollars for their benefit, a 
 large proportion of which should not have been taken from 
 the freighter. This drain has been steady, but not exactly 
 uniform in its operation, is c uncertain,’ sometimes giving 
 12 or 20 per cent., and sometimes not less than 30 per 
 cent, when carried out to its fullest extent to one party 
 more than to the other.” 
 
 •4'. .'1' \lr_ vV, 
 
 /f» /jv vjv vjv vr* 'T s 7Jv 
 
 “ The parcel and station division only partially applied, 
 
 produced the following results for the year ending Novem¬ 
 ber 30, 1859 • Of the whole amount of freight received and 
 delivered by the Western Road at Worcester, amounting to 
 165,634 tons, 159,769 tons was through freight to and from 
 Boston and Brighton, and only 5,865 tons was freight to 
 and from the way stations of the Worcester Road, excluding 
 Brighton, and of this whole amount only 101,209 tons was 
 through freight to the Western, and this whole freight was 
 carried on an average, 43 miles by the Worcester, or 98 per 
 cent, of the whole length of their road, and only 117 miles 
 by the Western, (over a road 156 miles long,) or 75 per 
 cent, of its whole length. The gross amount received by 
 
30 
 
 both Corporations for transporting tins freight, was $647,- 
 744.59, and averaged for each ton carried one mile, 2j 4 0 5 ^ 
 cents, while of this the Worcester received cents, and 
 the Western but cents for each ton carried one mile, 
 thus yielding to the Worcester a rate 22 J per cent, more 
 than to the Western. The gross receipts for joint freight for 
 1860 have been $727,549.22, and the average for each ton 
 per mile was 2 t 3 q 4 ^ cents, and the Worcester received for 
 their share an average of cents, while the Western 
 received but 2 T 2 ^- cents, yielding to the Worcester a rate 18 
 per cent, higher than to the Western.”* 
 
 To this rule—“ tons one mile ”—the Boston and Worces¬ 
 ter answers: u It is too manifest to require any argument, 
 that when the two roads have carried 20,000 tons of freight to 
 Springfield, 44 miles on the Boston and Worcester, and 54 on 
 the Western, the latter is not entitled to receive any more of 
 the receipts from this 20,000 tons, because that Corporation 
 owns 102 miles of road in addition. Stated in that way, the 
 claim is simply preposterous. Yet that, and that exactly, 
 is the claim made by the Western Road, and a rule of 
 division which involves this absurdity, is urged continually 
 as an equitable test, with an amazing confidence. We have 
 said that it is based on an obvious fiction. As an appro¬ 
 priate representation of the amount of work done by a 
 single Corporation, the ‘ movement,’ reduced to tons carried 
 one mile, may be a useful item of statistical information, 
 but conclusions based upon it as a single uniform represen¬ 
 tation of a thousand varying conditions of labor, cost, and 
 profit must be totally erroneous. It might as well be 
 claimed, that it requires the same military skill to lead an 
 
 ♦Twenty-fifth Annual Report Western, 18G0. 
 
31 
 
 army of 1,000 men 100 miles, as an army of 10,000 men 10 
 miles; imagine a coal merchant who has sent 100 tons 
 of coal 54 miles from Worcester to Springfield, receiving a 
 bill from the President of the Western Railroad for 5,400 
 tons of coal carried one mile ! 
 
 “ But no man requires argument to satisfy him that the 
 labor and expense of carrying 100 tons ten miles, 1,000 tons 
 one mile, 200 tons five miles, 333J tons three miles, must be 
 entirely different, and that different parties cannot claim the 
 same compensation or the same share for one as for the 
 other. 
 
 u Again, it is a familiar fact, upon which the president 
 of tlie Western Road lays great stress, that all long freights 
 must and can be carried for less per mile than short freights. 
 The longer the road, therefore, the greater proportion 
 of freight can, with a fair profit, be carried at low rates. 
 When a long road and a short road act together, and freight 
 goes over the whole of the short road and part or the 
 whole of the long road, has the long road any right to say, 
 in substance, to the short road— 4 By the invariable laws 
 of trade and business, we must both of us take long freights 
 at less per mile than short freights ? Here is a ton of freight 
 that passes 44 miles over your road and 20 miles over ours, 
 and the freighter pays two cents per ton per mile for it. 
 Here is another ton that goes 44 miles over your road and 
 100 over ours, and we cannot make him pay but one cent 
 per ton per mile.’ Instead of each taking its share of the 
 two sums, that is, two cents and one cent per mile respec¬ 
 tively on each class of freight, they must be aggregated 
 together by this process.”* 
 
 * Communication Directors to Stockholders, Boston and Worcester, 18G0. 
 
We omit the calculation which follows, but quote the 
 words used to state the result: 
 
 But to the Boston and Worcester, 88 tons one mile at 
 liVW cents, is $1.15. 
 
 “ And to the Western Road, 120 tons one mile at lyVVo 
 cents, is $1.57. 
 
 “ This shows why the rule is urged, not why it should be 
 adopted.” 
 
 Again, the first named opposes the “ tons one mile ” rule 
 for the reason that it gives that Road less “ on a hundred 
 tons of freight to Clappville because it also carries another 
 hundred tons over a hundred miles further, is as absurd as 
 it is unjust.” 
 
 Again omitting the table which succeeds, we state the con¬ 
 clusion : “ So that the Boston and Worcester Railroad 
 
 would receive for one hundred tons to Clappville, considered 
 by itself, upon a division by the rule urged as just by the 
 Western Road, $264. But if it carries another 100 tons the 
 same distance, and then divides the receipts from both by the 
 same rule, it receives only $261.97, and so carries this second 
 one hundred tons for actually less than nothing, and receives 
 less money because it has done twice as much work, that the 
 Western Road may gain over 30 per cent, on its own earn¬ 
 ings out of those of this Corporation. Such a result as this 
 must drive the Worcester Road to discourage one class of 
 freights at the expense of the other.” 
 
 Yet, the Western insist that the “ tons one mile ” rule is 
 sustained by the highest mathematical authority. In March, 
 1859, that Corporation submitted to Benjamin Peirce, Perkins 
 Professor of Astronomy and Mathematics in Harvard College, 
 the two modes of division thus: 
 
 “ First, by the Boston and Worcester Railroad, that each 
 parcel or Ion of freight to each station on the Western Rail- 
 
33 
 
 road should he divided separately , and the quota of the 
 Boston and Worcester Railroad determined thereby, and 
 vice versa. 
 
 “ Second, by the Western Railroad, that the entire receipts 
 of the joint busyness should be divided in the proportion in 
 which each Company has performed the work , i. e., that the 
 share of each should be determined by the number of tons 
 carried one mile by each Corporation. 
 
 u There being various prices for the several classes of 
 freight to all the stations, and various prices according to the 
 distance to which the same is transported, the share of the 
 entire receipts from the joint business must vary, for or 
 against one or the other Corporation, as one or the other rule 
 or principle of division shall be adopted.” 
 
 On the first of May, 1860, the learned Professor said that, 
 “ according to the principle of division claimed by the Wor¬ 
 cester Railroad, viz.: that the receipts from each package 
 shall be divided independently of all other packages accord¬ 
 ing to its own rate,” * * * * * u the Western 
 
 Railroad receives for every thousand tons carried a mile 
 $17 -j 9 q 8 q, and the Worcester Railroad for the same service 
 
 “ For the same service, then, the Worcester Railroad 
 receives $4^^ more than the Western Railroad, or twenty- 
 four per cent, more; and reciprocally, for every hundred 
 dollars thus paid to the Worcester Railroad it carries 
 4,486 ^ 2 q tons a mile, while for the same money, the Western 
 Railroad carries 5,56tons a mile, which is l,O86 T 3 0 4 ^ 
 tons more than that carried by the Worcester Railroad for 
 the same money. 
 
 “ It is apparent then that the carriage of this joint freight 
 is most unequally profitable to the two roads upon this prin- 
 
 5 
 
34 
 
 ciple of division, and that it is worth 24 per cent, more to the 
 Worcester than to the Western Railroad. 
 
 “ It is quite possible, indeed, that this work may be profit¬ 
 able to the Worcester Railroad, while it is of insignificant 
 value, or even a loss to the Western Railroad ; if the profits 
 which accrue from it to the Western Railroad are just, those 
 derived by the Worcester Railroad must be excessive. I 
 cannot understand how such an unequal compensation of 
 services can be consistent with the public interests. 
 
 “ If the principle of division claimed by the Western Rail¬ 
 road be adopted, the receipts from the joint freight must be 
 divided exactly in proportion to the work performed by each 
 Corporation; this gives, in the division of the receipts from 
 the October freight,— 
 
 To the Western Railroad, . . . 855,850 T yo 
 
 To the Worcester Railroad, . . 18,193^^ 
 
 Which differs in each case, . . 3,103 T 6 ^ 
 
 from the results of the previous division; the rate of com¬ 
 pensation is here the same for both roads, being 819-^^ on 
 every thousand tons carried a mile.’'* 
 
 In making these, and the extracts which precede, we have 
 held the scales of justice even. Still, the zeal of the two 
 Presidents and of the Solicitors of the two Corporations, even 
 upon collateral questions, and the constant apprehension 
 which they seemed to manifest lest something would be 
 omitted which we ought to hear and carefully weigh, induces 
 us—with other reasons—to include notice of the principal 
 tables which were submitted to us at the hearing. To these 
 four gentlemen, we accord—in all sincerity, great ability, 
 and, as representatives, unwearied diligence and extraordi- 
 
 * Twenty-sixth Annual Report Western, 1801. 
 
35 
 
 nary faithfulness to duty. If we now give the material parts 
 of the statistical evidence which they specially prepared— 
 with amazing labor—we shall complete our task in this 
 behalf, and stand acquitted of partial representations. First, 
 then, the Solicitor of the Boston and Worcester offered and 
 explained, sixteen tables of Advance Charges at Albany on 
 Boston and Brighton Freights, and amounts paid by that 
 Road to the Western, for the same number of months, with 
 still another table which contains the following recapitulation 
 of the results of the series:— 
 
 The total sum received in the 16 months on 
 freight to Boston and Brighton by the Boston 
 and Worcester Railroad, was 
 And at the end of that time there was due and 
 uncollected on this very freight, . 
 
 The total sum received thereon in the year 1861, 
 by the Boston Worcester Railroad, was 
 And at the end of that year there was due and 
 uncollected on the same, .... 
 
 The average due and uncollected per month, 
 (on the 16 months,) was .... 
 
 The average receipts per month, (on the 16 
 months,) by the Boston and Worcester Rail¬ 
 road, were ....... 
 
 The average due and uncollected per month, 
 (1861,) was ...... 
 
 The average receipts per month, (1861,) by the 
 Boston and Worcester Railroad, were . 
 
 $148,272 66 
 
 78,726 06 
 
 109,402 00 
 
 110,053 86 
 
 62,307 69 
 
 9,267 04 
 
 59,774 50 
 
 9,116 83 
 
 Next, a table in “ Illustration of the effect of not making 
 a special allowance for loading, unloading, collecting,” Ac., 
 
36 
 
 showing, that in the case cited as a test,—loss to Boston 
 and Worcester, and gain to Western, on an equal number 
 of tons to each, of 810,000. Third, 44 Comparative cost per 
 mile, in dollars,” of the two Roads, “branches excluded, 
 when practicable, as indicated in the columns of miles;” 
 with the figures 890,690 as the cost, in 1861, per mile of the 
 parent Road, and 810,117, of the Western.* Fourth, “Illus¬ 
 tration of 4 tons one mile,’ or 80 barrels flour actually 
 carried,”—(which table must be studied in order to be under¬ 
 stood)—showing that the Boston and Worcester received 
 4 t V 0 - cents per barrel, and the Western 38^0- cents.f Fifth, 
 44 Illustration of 4 tons one mile ’ division or a single ton of 
 joint freight, year ending November 30, 1861,” by which 
 it appears that the 44 Boston and Worcester would carry to 
 Albany for nothing,” and pay out money at four desig¬ 
 nated stations. Sixth, 44 Tonnage and freight receipts 
 between Boston and Stations on Western Railroad, and 
 between Albany and Brighton, year ending November 30, 
 1861,” which gives the Boston and Worcester per ton per 
 mile, 1 t 4 0 5 o 9 o cei d s ? and the Western, lyVo 3 o ceil t s for the 
 same ; (this result, however, under the Brooks, Hinckley 
 and Iiigginson Award,) on the Brighton and Albany. These, 
 we think, are sufficient;£ yet, we add 
 
 * This table contains also a detailed statement of the “ Working Expen¬ 
 ses ” of the two Roads : showing “Average for three years,” for G8 miles 
 of track, Boston and Worcester, $7,951, and Western for 173 miles of 
 track, $5,803. 
 
 f The calculation puts this flour under the rule “tons one mile,” with 
 first class freight at the rates of the tariff between Springfield and Boston. 
 
 X After a careful study of the remaining tables of the Boston and Wor¬ 
 cester, we cannot perceive that they embrace any thing relative to the divi¬ 
 sion of receipts from the joint business, which is not clearly illustrated, as 
 far as the opposition of that Road to the “tons one mile,” is concerned, 
 in the previous tables, of which the text gives the results. 
 
37 
 
 $s 
 
 CS 
 
 ir 
 
 •<S> 
 
 s 
 
 r. 
 
 03 
 
 co 
 
 o 
 
 50 
 
 03 
 
 co 
 
 O 
 
 ss 
 
 !o 
 
 o' 
 
 •S) 
 
 12 
 
 i<2 
 
 <42 
 
 Cj 
 
 O' 
 
 ^2 
 
 So 
 
 <42 
 
 ^2 
 
 ss 
 
 © 
 
 © 
 
 •Ki 
 
 © 
 
 o 
 
 so 
 
 "03 
 
 ^2 
 
 © 
 
 © 
 
 * 
 
 o 
 
 to o 
 
 .£ to 
 
 >3 
 
 22 
 
 tc 
 
 o 
 
 'M 
 
 O 
 
 G 
 
 rH 
 
 
 rH 
 
 r-y 
 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 2 
 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 OJ 
 
 rH 
 
 00 
 
 lO 
 
 tr 
 
 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 
 
 co 
 
 !S 
 
 It) 
 
 zn 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 05 
 
 o 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 05 
 
 ic 
 
 
 G 
 
 O 
 
 05 
 
 LCD 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 05 
 
 Cl 
 
 >5 
 
 *3 
 
 u- 
 
 O 
 
 « .2 
 
 cq^ 
 
 of 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 r-H 
 
 rH 
 
 CM 
 
 O 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 t- 
 
 t-f 
 
 m 
 
 VI 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 cS 
 
 h-» rG 
 
 2 S 
 
 ۩= 
 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 ■§& 
 
 ►2 
 
 < 
 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 H 
 
 0 
 
 5 
 
 « 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 t> 
 
 ◄ 
 
 V 
 
 u 
 
 •e 
 
 /. 
 
 cS 
 
 o 
 
 cS 
 
 w 
 
 g 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 05 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 >o 
 
 CO 
 
 »o 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 rH 
 
 rH 
 
 ud 
 
 05 
 
 05 
 
 iO 
 
 CO 
 
 IO 
 
 o 
 
 t- 
 
 05 
 
 o 
 
 1- 
 
 o 
 
 
 CO 
 
 lO 
 
 Oi 
 
 o 
 
 fr 
 
 Cl 
 
 05 
 
 CO 
 
 r- 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 »o 
 
 CO 
 
 iO 
 
 1- 
 
 co 
 
 00 
 
 1- 
 
 iO 
 
 Cl 
 
 o 
 
 r-H 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 -H 
 
 lO 
 
 N 
 
 co 
 
 LO 
 
 05 
 
 
 CO 
 
 Cl 
 
 N 
 
 o 
 
 Cl 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 05 
 
 
 t-f 
 
 Cl 
 
 IO 
 
 N 
 
 
 o 
 
 Cl 
 
 Cl 
 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 rH 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 -M 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 o 
 
 t-H 
 
 Cl 
 
 Cl 
 
 Cl 
 
 
 
 co 
 
 
 ۩= 
 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 m= 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 s « 
 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 Cfl 
 
 > 
 
 *-H 
 
 ft 
 
 O 
 
 G u 
 
 C G2 
 
 C c5 
 o « 
 H 
 
 
 u 
 
 tn 
 
 o 
 
 'A 
 
 pH • 
 
 ^ o 
 
 o 
 
 <13 ^ 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 Jh . 
 
 « 
 
 C- OJ 
 
 H 
 
 to P. 
 
 O . 
 
 S c 
 
 G W 
 
 C3 O 
 
 
 > ~ 
 
 o a 
 
 Hj 
 
 
 m 
 
 w H 
 
 G3 
 
 
 r-* 
 
 » o 
 
 c3 *53 
 
 o 
 
 »G cS 
 
 
 co O 
 
 
 O H 
 
 o 
 
 »G 
 
 
 13 
 
 V) 
 
 r CS 
 
 > 
 
 o 5 
 
 >—( 
 
 r- C*_ 
 
 ft 
 
 5 ® 
 
 
 CO 
 
 05 
 
 tr 
 
 CM 
 
 O 
 
 rH 
 
 a> 
 
 i i i i I 
 
 CO 
 
 05 
 
 rH 05 05 05 O 
 CO (M N CD 
 
 00 UO N 05 CO CO H 
 CO rH Cl tr O <01 O 
 
 rH^rH rH^ rH^ 0_^ 
 
 05 (01 rH rH i—( i—I 
 
 oooooooooooooo 
 oooooooooooooo 
 © O ©^CM^rH o © 0^0 00 © © © 
 
 CO CO* ccf of o' o' -f o' of go" of of lO © 
 CO CO N N CO OU> 00 ICO CO Cl N CO Cl 
 t—^ r-i CM^ CO r-^rH CD NCO H H 
 
 r-f rjf CO - 
 
 ۩= 
 
 SNOOOCUOCC^NrH^CDr-IH 
 t- lO o H lO lO h O O H CO QO 
 05t^05t^O’^l>-Ol'^Oir5»-OCOCO 
 
 co ci H co H H co ci oi oi ci ci coi oi 
 
 lO'sHOCOOOO^HdttlNCOQ'^ 
 
 ClCONCDNTtiCON'^NClCOClH 
 
 OCKMONCOOSNCMCONiO^N 
 OCDHNOCINHOONCOOhiO 
 T}< CO N CO OI O N H LO C rH 05 OI 00 
 
 CO CM 00 GO 
 rH iO 
 
 ۩= rH 
 
 rH Cl CO CM 
 
 rH CO rH 
 
 00 CO 00 CM 
 
 CO 
 
 l© 
 
 Cl 
 
 t-f 
 
 co 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 rH 
 
 05 
 
 © 
 
 of 
 
 r-H 
 
 <=& 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 cq_ 
 
 io 
 
 rH 
 
 CM 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 © 
 
 cc 
 
 cc 
 
 co 
 
 ۩= 
 
 « 
 
 s- 
 
 0) 
 
 • -*-> 
 
 tn o 
 
 s~ © g 
 
 3 % 2 
 
 jg 
 
 © >» G 
 Sh /h 
 
 o © _ 
 
 e r 3 
 G 
 cS 
 
 © . 
 o r 
 
 rt © 
 
 r" cS 
 
 r O 
 C 
 cS 
 
 05 cfi 
 
 C | -3 © 
 O •- o 
 *2 > s- 
 
 00 o O 
 
 CQ 
 
 c 
 
 0) 
 
 cS 
 
 §5 
 
 ^ -d 
 
 3 ~ 
 
 3 cS 
 
 CD V 
 
 •-S T5 
 © ~r 
 05 ,o 
 C 
 
 G S- 
 
 o «e 
 
 Offi 
 
 o 
 
 > 
 
 G 
 
 £ 
 
 05 
 
 23 
 
 © 
 
 c 
 
 cS 
 
 M 
 
 O 
 
 H 
 
 £ 
 
 05 
 
 o 
 
 tS 
 ’ G 
 
 O'* 8 
 
 2 
 
 03 © 
 
 cS 
 
 t-i 
 
 - 4 ~» _. 
 
 © G 
 05 U. 
 
 O ® 
 5> 
 
 r -4—> 
 
 > ^ 
 »> <L> 
 CD Sm 
 
 a5~ cs 
 'U ^05 
 
 W ^5 
 
 G -3? 
 CS 
 
 .2 
 
 G H 
 
 £K 
 
 h! ' 
 
 3 o 
 
 C O *rT 
 
 «S ^ s 
 
 '03 TO G 
 ^ c* * ^ 
 —• >— ^rH 
 
 "o5 05 qj 
 
 > > ^ 
 
 _05 _05 tJ 
 
 00^4 
 
 H 
 
Wc add, too, in set-off to the answer of Professor Peirce, 
 a comprehensive passage from the reply of Dr. B. A. Gould, 
 to a letter addressed to him by the Solicitor of the Boston 
 and Worcester, dated May 1, 1862, in which it is said that 
 that Corporation “ desire to present to the arbitrators [your 
 Committee] certain computations illustrating the effect of 
 the different principles of division suggested by the parties,” 
 <fcc., Ac. Having examined the questions put to him and 
 made his calculations, as concerns the actual receipts and 
 tonnage on the freight between Boston and certain designated 
 points, which, we infer, the Solicitor selected to prove the injus¬ 
 tice of the rule of u tons one mile,” generally \ the learned 
 Doctor states his conclusion in these words: “ While the 
 Worcester Hoad would receive 87,325.96 on the sum of its 
 shares of the Clappville and Charlton freight alone, and 
 $<,315.21 on its shares of their sums, it would, by the rule 
 of the T\ estern Railroad, receive but $6,738.66 after carrv- 
 ing as much more freight bound to Albany at Albany rates. 
 Consequently, by doubling the work, it would incur an 
 actual loss of about eight per cent, on freight to these sta¬ 
 tions the addition of the Albany business entailing, not 
 only a relative, but a positive loss of $587.30, or $576.55, as 
 
 we may take the Clappville and Charlton freight separately 
 or jointly.” 
 
 llie Solicitor of the Western called our attention to twelve 
 tables, lettered consecutively from “ A.” to “ L.” inclusive. 
 The first shows that for the year ending November 30, 1860, 
 the Boston and Worcester received 2^ 8 q 8 q- cents per passen¬ 
 ger and ton per mile, and the Western Table “ B.” 
 
 makes the same comparison lor the next year, with the result 
 of 2 i 4 o 2 o 2 o> to the first, and of 2 ^ojl to the last named Road. 
 In u C.” we have a u Comparison of passenger receipts per 
 
30 
 
 mile run, of joint or continuous trains,” <fcc., with the final 
 figures of $1.40^2^- to the short Road, and $0. 88 -^ 5 - cents, 
 “ each mile run” to the Western. In “D.” the statistical 
 conclusion is that the “Per cent, joint receipts.from passen¬ 
 gers and freight ” for the year 1859, was ‘ 8 -^ per cent. 011 
 the cost of the Boston and Worcester, and 6 -^j on that of the 
 long Road. I 11 “ E.” we have the same calculations for 
 1860, with the result of 8 -^ and of 7-^ ;—the difference in 
 favor of the short Road, as in the preceding year. I 11 “ F.” 
 we are told that, in 1860, the cost of the Boston and Wor¬ 
 cester, including branches, was $4,738,441.70, and its gross 
 receipts on that sum, 22 I -J 0 - per cent.; while the same 
 receipts, on the cost of the Western, $11,029,079.41, were 
 only 17 T f q- per cent, on cost. Table “ G.” shows that the 
 per cent, of net earnings 011 the cost of the short Road, aver¬ 
 aged for the two years above mentioned, was HfW an ^ ^ Jl1 ^ 
 ^ i¥o the other. In “ II.” we have figures to show that 
 for these two years, the u excess which the Boston and Wor¬ 
 cester received over the amount which they would have 
 received at the rate received by the Western,” was $69,077.29. 
 Table “ I.” represents that the expense (including interest 
 on capital) of transporting one passenger and one ton one 
 mile in 1860, was •£££$ of a cent more on the Western than 
 011 the connecting Road. We omit “J.” and “K.” The 
 final table compares the cost of the two Roads, and shows 
 that the average percentage of net receipts for the ten years 
 ending with 1860, was 9^ 3 q- by the Boston and Worcester, 
 and 7 -j^j- by the Western. 
 
 We preserve these arithmetical operations, then, not only 
 because they were thought of moment in the case, but because 
 they arc valuable for reference, and afford evidence of the 
 estimable mathematical skill at the command of these Corpo- 
 
40 
 
 rations, and of the admirable system of “ counting the cost,” 
 which they exhibit in moving persons and things from Boston 
 to Albany, and on the branches of the direct line. Again, 
 we retain the* concluding figures, specially, to prove how diffi¬ 
 cult is the task of adjusting the differences between these 
 Corporations, which, we cannot doubt, are honestly, and, as 
 it is our fortune to know, are persistently maintained. 
 Indeed, as we have mused upon all that we have read and 
 all that we have heard, we have thought—what with these 
 vexed figures, and these contradictory statements of wit¬ 
 nesses, even of 66 experts,” and of essential disagreements in 
 memory as to facts—what would be the award of Professor 
 Peirce and of Dr. Gould themselves ? 
 
 An Award for a single year: and the line from Boston to 
 Albany co-existent with the capacity of man to excavate 
 earth and rock, and fashion iron and wood! Your Com¬ 
 mittee, as Referees, met the representatives of this line on 
 seventeen days. We examined forty-two Annual Reports, 
 fifty-one tables of statistics, many freight and passenger 
 tariffs, several memorandum books, calculations of interest, 
 and heaps of other pamphlets and papers. We listened to 
 arguments, testimony, and conversations, which, as written 
 out by phonographers, fills four hundred and fifty-six foolscap 
 and ninety letter sheet pages; and we had nine private 
 consultations after the hearing, to digest and to dispose of 
 this mass of matter. And all this time, and all these docu¬ 
 ments, simply to fix terms for the “joint business” of the 
 Boston and Worcester and Western Railroads, from May 81, 
 1862, to the same day, Anno Domini, 1863 ! What next ? 
 Without union, what ? Probably frequent appeals to the 
 Supreme Court for Commissioners, or to the General Court 
 for further legislation, or to Referees. And this controversy 
 
41 
 
 is to continue ; and this Board is to hear—as from its very 
 organization, it has heard—complaints, and just complaints 
 of injury, great injury, to the business of Boston, and of 
 direct consequence to, Massachusetts. 
 
 This city bears one-third of the taxable burdens of the 
 Commonwealth ; while on every public emergency our 
 merchants and bank officers arc compelled to meet the first 
 and principal calls for pecuniary aid to the State and to the 
 Nation. Carefully enough do we limit our remarks on a 
 point which, if discussed now, when every true heart beats 
 only to save, to perpetuate our national existence, would 
 invite criticism ; yet no human being can of right deny that, 
 in the nature of things, Boston, in peace and in war, willing 
 or unwilling—if any one will have it so —must respond to 
 every invocation for men and means to promote the public 
 weal. In the fierce competition with sister cities to maintain 
 our commercial supremacy as the capital of the extreme 
 North, and in the intense rivalry of lines of transport by 
 land and by sea, this Board may claim—we repeat with 
 emphasis—may claim help of every man, woman, and child 
 in Massachusetts, in the removal of every unnatural, of every 
 corporate obstacle to a free, to an unlimited intercourse with 
 the producers of breadstuff's and meats in the great West. 
 
 Nearly eighteen years have elapsed since Committees of 
 the line whioh connects us with the Hudson, declared in 
 favor of union, for what nature so clearly marks, “ a single, 
 distinct, and entire route;” and the results of rejecting 
 their recommendation have been feebly stated in this Report. 
 The past, in our judgment, indicates the future. 
 
 Awards for a single year: for the time which a mother 
 nourishes her babe at her bosom! Annual awards, when a 
 whole century hardly marks the extreme limit of human 
 
 c 
 
42 
 
 life ! Commissioners or arbitrators to determine from one 
 month of May to another, how two railroads shall divide a 
 certain part of their earnings! Yearly criminations and 
 recriminations ; honest, yet serious disagreements in matters 
 of fact; accusations that one Corporation fills its coffers at 
 the expense of the other; averments and denials of framing 
 local tariffs to promote the growth of certain places, and to 
 divert the business of Western Massachusetts from Boston 
 to New York; allegations that one Road cares more for its 
 connection with Norwich than with Albany, and retorts that 
 the President of the other cares too much for his private 
 interests as a Director and large stockholder in competing 
 lines; continual additions to disputed items which already 
 exceed eighty thousand dollars; appalling exhibitions of 
 unsettled freight bills, because of imputed remissness of the 
 only party that possesses the power to apply a remedy ; 
 altercations which prevent the settlement of accounts year 
 after year; * intimations from the short Road that its “ natural 
 connection” is with the “Tunnel,” and the reply of the 
 Western that with legislative sanction, that Road may be 
 extended, and reach Boston “ by a line wholly independent,” 
 statements and denials of copartnership relations ; and accu¬ 
 mulating complicities which, finally, the most acute minds 
 may find utterly insoluble. Why, the present difficulties, so 
 rapidly enumerated; why, “ on a single, distinct, and entire 
 route,” why relations which,—as under the Brooks, Hinckley 
 and Higginson Award,—require the construction and con- 
 
 * Mr. Hayes, cashier of the "Western, stated to the chairman of the 
 Committee and to the Secretary of the Board, that, he “ had been in the 
 service of that Road about twelve years, and that there had been only one 
 admitted balance of account between the two Roads for that whole period, 
 which balance is even now in dispute, so that in fact, there has been no 
 actual settlement for these twelve years.” 
 
43 
 
 stant use of a table containing about twelve thousand figures ?* 
 Who, that remembers the eloquent appeals in Faneuil Hall 
 and elsewhere, to induce subscriptions to stock for communi¬ 
 cation by rail with Worcester, can doubt for a single instant 
 that all the arguments then addressed to the patriotism and 
 interest of the people of Massachusetts, to complete that 
 enterprise, would have as cogently urged for the same con¬ 
 nection with Albany, had it been thought possible to obtain 
 the requisite amount of capital ? Who does not know that 
 the persons named in the Act of Incorporation of the West¬ 
 ern, were the Directors of the Boston and Worcester, for the 
 year 1833. f And yet, twenty years after the former was 
 opened to the Hudson, this “ single, distinct, and entire 
 route ” is divided, at variance, and exhibits at every disclo¬ 
 sure to Commissioners and to Referees, elements so discord¬ 
 ant as to recall the medley fused by the poet’s brain, in the 
 cauldron of the three witches in Macbeth. 
 
 This Report, much too long, on a subject of ordinary 
 interest, will now be concluded in the words of the Commit¬ 
 tees $ of the two Corporations, in 1845. “In the first place,” 
 they say, “ the great Western route, from Boston, the capital 
 
 * [Copy.] 
 
 Boston and Worcester Railroad, General Freight Office, > 
 
 Boston, June 1G, 18G2. 5 
 
 G. Twichell :—Sir,—In reply to Mr. Sabine’s inquiry, I would state that 
 the large table referred to by him, contains 4,200 sets of figures—averaging 
 nearly three figures to a set. Respectfully, 
 
 (Signed) H. Earl. 
 
 f Nathan Hale, David Henshaw, George Bond, Henry Williams, Daniel 
 Denny, Joshua Clapp, and Eliphalet Williams. 
 
 X Jona. Chapman, S. Bartlett, John Hathaway, Moses Williams, Com¬ 
 mittee on the part of the Boston and Worcester Railroad Corporation ; 
 Josiah Quincy, Jr., Addison Gilmore, H. Andrews, Joseph Whitney, Com¬ 
 mittee on the part of the Western Railroad Corporation. 
 
44 
 
 of New England, to Albany, which is the gateway of the 
 West, is so clearly marked as a single , distinct and entire 
 route , that it must strike every one, as the most natural and 
 proper course, that the great channel of railroad communica¬ 
 tion between these two prominent points, should be one 
 likewise. 
 
 “ Iii the second place, there will be a very considerable 
 saving in the expenses of management, and in doing the busi¬ 
 ness of the line, if these two Roads are made one. A less 
 number of officers, agents and subordinates will be required. 
 The engines and cars of all kinds can be more advanta¬ 
 geously arranged and economically used. A smaller aggre¬ 
 gate of motive-power will be sufficient for the work of the 
 whole line, if under one administration, to say nothing of 
 the better system and efficiency that can be introduced. 
 And many of the expenses which both the present companies 
 must now incur, will be required but once for the whole 
 line, if united in one. 
 
 “In the third place, by bringing about the proposed union, 
 an end vnll be put forever to all those perplexing questions, 
 and difficult and expensive controversies , which have already 
 arisen , and are likely continually to arise between two com¬ 
 panies situated like those in question. It is believed by your 
 committees that the tendency of these controversies between 
 contiguous railroad companies , is prejudicial to the public 
 interests , and to the safety and value of the private property 
 in their stocks * And this last must be felt to be a peculiarly 
 important consideration, in a case, where the Commonwealth 
 is a large owner and a large creditor of one of the companies, 
 and yet the umpire in all questions between the two.” 
 
 * The Italics in this paragraph are ours. 
 
45 
 
 And they say, finally, that they “would recommend to 
 their respective companies, the adoption of the proposed plan 
 of union, and such acts on the part of each, as may be 
 necessary to carry it into effect. And as they have so entirely 
 agreed upon all points of the subject committed to them, 
 they have thought best, instead of separate reports to each 
 company, to make this joint report to both.” 
 
 These, be it remembered, are the views of every member 
 of the two committees.* And the Hon. Nathan Hale—a 
 name never to be pronounced without emotions of the most 
 profound gratitude and honor—when President of the Boston 
 and Worcester, gave his approval to the measure thus, 
 at the opening of his “ Remarks “ I have no hesitation in 
 expressing the opinion that advantages of some importance 
 would result from a union of the two railroads in one inter¬ 
 est, and placing the direction of them under one manage¬ 
 ment.” ****** And again: “I conclude 
 by repeating the opinion, that a union of the two companies 
 will be advantageous to the proprietors of both, in securing 
 a unity of action, and removing the possibility of a collision 
 of interests, by blending them in one concern, under a single 
 management, provided it can be accomplished on such a 
 basis, as will secure to the proprietors of each, their just 
 share of the joint property.” 
 
 As now, we submit the results of our investigations to the 
 Government of this Board, we cannot but invite attention to 
 the fact, that we have expressed no opinion upon the 
 relative merits of the controversy which has so long existed 
 between these large, useful, and prosperous Corporations. 
 
 * Theodore Lyman, on the part of the Boston and Worcester, declined 
 to serve; Edward Austin, selected by the Western, was absent from the 
 country. 
 
46 
 
 Our judicial functions ceased with the hearing and with the 
 Award. Our duty on the present occasion is simply histori¬ 
 cal. Indeed, at no period—whether as Referees, or as your 
 
 Committee—have we permitted reflections which would lead 
 / 
 
 to the least partiality or discrimination ; and we part with 
 the Boston and Worcester, and Western Railroad Corpora¬ 
 tions without an unkind thought to either. The difficulties 
 of which we have spoken are intrinsic; and the common 
 fault is, that neither will make the only movement, which, 
 —as seems to us—can produce harmony of action. 
 
 Both Roads—as relates to system in details, division 
 of labor, and economy—are admirably managed; our 
 regret, our deep regret is, that the Presidents—Ginery 
 Twichell and Chester W. Chapin — who are gentlemen 
 of marked ability—are so much devoted to rules of dividing 
 the receipts of the “joint business,” that a considerable 
 portion of their intellectual power is absolutely lost to the 
 public. 
 
 For the many courtesies of both, for the ready conformity 
 to our wishes by the highly respected Solicitors, Messrs. 
 George S. Hale and James D. Colt, and for the important 
 information imparted by the several officials at Springfield, 
 Albany, and Boston, we beg to record our cordial acknowl¬ 
 edgments. 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 C. 0. WHITMORE. 
 
 GEO. C. RICHARDSON. 
 
 NATH’L HARRIS. 
 
 JAS. II. BEAL. 
 
 JOSEPH S. FAY. 
 
 Rooms Board Trade, August fl. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

f' 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 -