mile, and at no previous period did they exceed three cents
per ton per mile. The advance to present rates, was ren-
dered necessary to keep up the condition of the road and
equipment, which had greatly depreciated in value during
'the preceeding three years when the trade upon it was
light.

In order that your Honorable body may clearly understand
the result of the working of the road daring the past three
years, the following statement of receipts and outlays, is
presented :

In 1864, the gross revenue was $139,981.56
In 1865, the gross revenue was 344,699.42
In 1866, the gross revenue was 431,437.08

———————— $916,118.06
The payments during the same period was :
For ordinary operating expenses $848,806.61
For equipment and improvem't, 578,266.01

———————$1,427,072.62

Showing an excess of expenditure over income $510,954.56

Under such a statement of facts, compiled from official re-
cords, it will surely not be alleged that the Cumberland and
Pennsylvania Railroad Company have sought to impose
an onerous tariff of rates for transportation upon its cus-
tomers.

In this connection it may be stated that the heavy aunual
outlays of the company to develope the Cumberland coal
trade have thus far been attended wish no remuneration to
themselves, nor in the whole thirteen years of the company's
operation, have the stockholders received the smallest divi-
dend from their investment in the property.

The very highest rates ever imposed upon hauls of 15
miles and over, eastwardly, was during the month of April
and May, 1865, when the charge was 4 1/2cents per ton per
mile. The half cent was drooped on 1st of June, of that
year, leaving the rates as they now stand at four cents per
ton per mile eastwardly, and six cents per ton per mile west-
wardly. The reason for making the distinction in the rates,
is found in the fact that while the.westward delivery involves
the maximum haul of 8 1/2 miles only, the range of the east-
ward delivery is between 15 miles minimum and 29 m.les
maximum.

These rates were therefore established by the company
upon the theory that the operating expenses of a railway in-
crease in due proportion as the length of the haul is di-
minished. The company cite this fact in support of the pro-
priety of the distinction made in their tariff of rates without
the fear of successful refutation. The Baltimore and Ohio
Rail Road Company, which carried some seventy per cent, of