3%S ELIMINARY REPORT Chicago Railway Terminal c ommission Submitted to City Council Committee on Railway Terminals MARCH 29. 1915 I KBL-lXJtaH PRELIMINARY REPORT Chicago Railway Terminal Commission i!N1VER iLLlNOIb Submitted to CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON RAIL- WAY TERMINALS MARCH 29, 1915 1 t- < ^^^-.- VN^^ >x\N .c\ ■^H ^ ^ 'S TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter of Transmittal V Creation of Commission 1 History 2 Fundamental Principles 8 Effect of Competitive Theory 10 Co-operative Terminals 12 Passenger Service 15 Through Eouting 15 Freight Service 16 Less than Carload (L. C. L.) Freight 17 Universal Freight Stations 18 Two Level Plan 18 Intensive Development 19 Electrification 20 Chicago Terminal Situation 21 Eailroads in the City Plan 22 Present Method of Handling Merchandise Freight 25 Present Superficial Use of Terminal Properties 26 Chicago Eiver Straightening 27 Summary of General Eecommendations 28 Present Terminal Facilities. Exhibit 1 33 Eearrangement of Passenger Terminals. " II 40 Eearrangement of Freight Terminals. ' ' III 47 Eiver Straightening. " IV 58 European Trip. Appendix " A " 61 Supplement to " "A" '. 75 Statistics. " "B" 96 Chicago Statistics 96 General Eailroad Statistics 125 ILLUSTEATIOXS. Page Frontispiece Chicago — Eailroad Eoute and Terminal Map 37 Central Freight House District 38 Eailroad Occupancy 39 Three Terminal Station Plan 43 Three Terminal Station Plan — Alternative 44 Four Terminal Station Plan 46 Eearrangement of Freight Terminals — Scheme No. 1 49 ^^ Eearrangement of Freight Terminals — Scheme No. 2 51 H Eearrangement of Freight Terminals — Scheme No. 3 53 Eearrangement of Freight Terminals — Scheme No. 4 55 t." Eearrangement of Freight Terminals — Scheme No. 5 57 ^ Eiver Straightening 60 ^ Map of Toronto 89 y. Map of Montreal 90 *^ Map of Boston 91 ;^ Map of New York 92 iii 313617 TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continupa. Page Map of Loiiilon 93 Map uf Paris 94 Map of Hi'rliii . . 95 LIST OF TABLES. TnhW' No. Page 1. r!iss,ii;;ii Iriiiiinals PriiH'ipnl .\niorican Titios 96 2. ^hi<•a^;o I'nssiMipor Tormiiials — Trains 97 .1. Chicago Passongor Terminals — Passengers 99 4. Chicago rnssongor Terminals — ^^ail 100 5. Chicago Tassenger Terminals — Baggage 101 6. Chicago BasstMiger Terminals — Express 102 7. Summary by Stations 103 8. House Freight ILnndled Insiile City Limits 104 9. House Freight Hamlled Inside Central Area 104 10. House Freight llamlleii by Districts — Central Area lO.l 11. T.-.uii Freight Handled Inside City Limits 106 12. Team Freight Handled Inside Central Area 107 13. Team Freight Handled by Districts — Central Area 107 14. Outbouml Transfer Freight Inside City Limits 109 15. Inbound Transfer Freight Inside City Limits 109 16. Railroad Freight Facilities — Central Area 110 17. House and Team Track Facilities between State Street and Chicago Riv.-r 112 IV LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL City Council Committee on Railway Terminals: Gentlemen : The Railway Terminal Commission transmits herewith a pre- liminary report on the Chicago railway terminal situation. Since its formation, May 25, 1914, your Commission — collec- tively, separately and through its staff — has been engaged in the col- lection of data and in a study of the terminal situation. In addition to the Chicago situation, the Commission — as set forth more specifically in its report — has made personal examination on the ground of the terminals of Toronto, Montreal, Boston, New York, Liverpool, Manchester, London, Paris, Brussels and Antwerp. Your Commission considered, analyzed and reported to your Committee on the application for an ordinance filed by the Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad Company, providing for the construction of a temporary annex to its Dearborn Street Passenger Station, in order to provide for the care of its immigrant and suburban passenger business. The Commission' secured from the Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad Company consent to a provision in the ordinance — substantially similar to that contained in the Union Station ordinance of the Pennsylvania Railroad and its associates — for the straightening of the Chicago River. This ordinance is still pending before the City Council. Your Commission also investigated and reported to the Commit- tee on Local Industries upon an application by the Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Company authorizing certain additional main tracks, a new coach yard and other facilities. This ordinance required the consideration of the Commission and its staff during a period of nearly two months and involved a personal inspection of the ground and repeated conferences with the officials of the Balti- more & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Company, and Mr. Daniel Willard, Chairman of the Board, and also President of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company. A report was finally made to the Com- mittee on Local Industries on January 26, 1915, and an ordinance embodying the suggestions of the Commission was recommended to the City Council by the Committee on Local Industries, and passed by the City Council on February 19, 1915. This ordinance — by pro- viding the Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Company with a new coach yard and the facilities connected therewith — enabled it to vacate its present holdings, thereby removing practically the last obstacle to the Union Station project. A provision consenting to the straightening of the Chicago River — substantially similar to that contained in the Union Station ordinance — was also secured from the Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Company. Interviews with the officials of other railroads abutting on the Chicago River lead the Commission to believe that favorable con- v^ideration by these railroads can be secured for the river straighten- ing project and that its accomplishment can be brought about more speedily than has been generally supposed. Your Commission has also acted in an advisory capacity to the Chicago Municipal Markets Commission and has given considerable time to the investigation and study of the transportation and terminal aspect of this project — which it still has under consideration. It has been conferred with and has attended various Committee meetings and conferences in connection with the Lake Front project. It has investigated the general freight situation in Chicago, and in the report appended hereto will be found the preliminary results of these studies. It has continued the investigation of the passenger terminal situ- ation as a whole, and the preliminary results of this investigation Lcre outlined in the attached report. Your Commission has also had referred to it five ordinances and iourteen resolutions, orders and communications in regard to elec- trification and smoke abatement. This subject is so important that your Commission has felt that it would be unwise to formulate its views thereon until after the formal report of the Chicago Associa- tion of Commerce Committee of Investigation on Smoke Abatement and Electrification of Railway Terminals has been made pubhc, and the Commission can have the benefit of the facts and recommenda- tions therein set forth. It is very important that the Commission should have this report before arriving at final definite conclusions in regard to important details of the general terminal situation, as it is expected that this report — the result of the study of a special Com- mission which has spent four years and several hundred thousand dollars in the accumulation of facts and in the investigation of this project — will contain data and information of the greatest value. It is generally understood that the question of the electrification of the VI roads and the rearrangement and unification of trackage facilities are so interlaced that they should be carefully considered in con- junction with each other. Your Commission finds the terminal situation so complex and so many interests involved that the attached report is simply submitted as a preliminary progress report in order that your Committee and the City Council may be intelligently advised as to the progress made to date. It is clearly apparent that important applications to the City Council will be made in the near future for changes in the terminals of various railroads, and these applications will afiford valuable op- portunities for improving our terminal situation as a whole. Among these will be : First — The application for such privileges as the Illinois Central Railroad Company may need in order to provide a new passenger terminal on the Lake Front and access thereto by other railroad lines which may be induced to use this terminal, in connection with which it will be of vital importance to safeguard the interests of the City, especially with respect to access to the proposed harbor im- provements for rail and vehicular traffic. Second — The application for radical changes in freight and pas- senger terminals of the Chicago & Western Indiana or Chicago Belt group of roads, which changes these roads have been studying and discussing for some time. Third^The application for changes in both the passenger and freight terminals of the Lake Shore and Rock Island roads. These changes seem to be inevitable and are believed to be under contem- plation for the not distant future. Out of these changes and the changes under consideration by the Western Indiana group of rail- roads, should evolve an intensive co-operative freight development in the territory north of Sixteenth Street, between Clark Street and the Chicago River straightened. It may possibly involve a new co- operative passenger terminal for some of the above mentioned and other railroads — such as the Baltimore & Ohio — somewhere in the territory between State Street and the Chicago River. Fourth — Applications for the location and the development of one or more produce terminals. This matter is now under serious consideration, and several localities have been suggested, the selec- tion of which is a matter of grave importance to the City of Chicago, the produce merchants and all the various railroads. The study of the general railroad situation in Chicago has led your Commission to believe that any adequate terminal policy or plan vu should include the treatment of the railroad situation embraced in the entire Chicago terminal area in its social, industrial, commercial and transportation interests. Your Commission hopes the Committee will appreciate the diffi- culties that surround the solution of the railway terminal problem and again calls your attention to the fact that the attached is neces- sarily but a preliminary report, showing progress to date. Respectfully submitted, Chairman vni PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHICAGO RAILW^AY TERMINAL COMMISSION PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHICAGO RAILWAY TERMINAL COMMISSION The Chicago Railway Terminal Commission was created by a resolution which was adopted at a meeting of the City Council held May 25, 1914, said resolution being as follows : Whereas^ The City Council Committee on Railway Ter- minals has been engaged for a year past in the consideration of the location of freight and passenger terminals for the Penn- sylvania Railroad Company and other railways; and Whereas, In the consideration of the problems presented the committee has received timely and efficient assistance from the Citizens' Terminal Plan Committee and the Chicago Plan Commission of the City of Chicago in its labors ; and Whereas, Other railway terminal questions will arise in the near future requiring a broad and comprehensive study and investigation of the railway terminal situation and a study of the questions involved in locating terminals from a technical standpoint to the end that future railway terminals may be located with regard to the best interests of the citizens of the City of Chicago, the railways and the traveling public; now, therefore, be it Resolved, by the City Council of the City of Chicago, That there be and hereby is constituted a railway terminal commission to consist of the following seven members : Walter L. Fisher, Bion J. Arnold (upon recommendation of the Citizens' Terminal Plan Committee of the City of Chi- cago), E. H. Bennett (upon recommendation of the Chicago Plan Commission of the City of Chicago), whose compensation is not to be paid by the City of Chicago; the Commissioner of Public Works, the Corporation Counsel of the City of Chicago, the chairman of the Committee on Railway Terminals, and John F. Wallace, the compensation of said Wallace to be paid by the City of Chicago. Said John F. Wallace is hereby ap- pointed and shall act as Chairman of said Railway Terminals Commission, and in case of his death, resignation, or inability to act, his successor shall be appointed by the Committee on Railway Terminals. „-t»t,'- The term of office of said commissioners shall expire the first day of April, 1915. The duties of said Commission shall be to make a compre- hensive, adequate and expert study of the passenger and freight railway terminal situation and problems, present and future, in the City of Chicago, and to advise the City Council or its com- mittees upon any matters connected with or relative to railway terminals and to render reports to the City Council from time to time of the results of its investigations, provided, however, that said Commission shall make a full report of its investiga- tions, if possible, not later than January 1, 1915. In case of a vacancy occurring in said Commission by reason of death, resignation, removal from the city or any other cause, the vacancy so caused may be filled in the manner prescribed for the original appointments. HISTORY. The Columbian Exposition, held in Chicago in 1893, did much to awaken the citizens of Chicago to a civic pride, and out of the spirit engendered at this time there was produced what is known as the ''Chicago Plan.'' In 1908, the City of Chicago officially accepted from the Com- mercial Club of Chicago a report on the Plan of Chicago, prepared under the direction of the late Daniel H. Burnham. With the authority of the City, the Mayor appointed a Plan Commission and transmitted to it the report of the Commercial Club, for study and de- velopment. This was the first organized efifort for creating a gen- eral plan for the future development of the City and has formed the basis of the work of the Chicago Plan Commission, looking towards the execution of a comprehensive plan for a harmonious and sys- tematic development of the City. The necessity for improvement and reorganization of the freight terminals of Chicago is pointed out in the report and the strongest kind of recognition given to the economic waste that is going on in Chicago by reason of the lack of arrangement and co-ordination of the railroad facilities. In this connection, recommendation was made for a common freight handling center properly related to all the rail- roads in the downtown district and to the docks. It w^as proposed- to group the passenger stations in two general locations to the west and to the south of the center of the city and to connect them — not only with each other — but with the downtown and outlying areas by means of properly co-ordinated local transpor- tation facilities and an adequate street system. The bearing of these important problems on the economic life of the City was carefully 2 pointed out. The statement was made that the prosperity of the City in its relation to other cities in the country was dependent on the proper handling of these problems. The members of the Plan Commission early saw that a solution of the terminal situation was largely essential to the development of their plan, and the publicity incident to this work induced other architects and engineers to give study to the subject and to evolve plans for terminal development. The thought and agitation which had been carried on for several years along these lines culminated when — early in 1913 — the Union Station Company, which furnishes station facilities for a group of railroads on the west side of the Chicago River at Adams Street, made application to the City for an ordinance providing for a new terminal station. To meet the situation, the City Council in its organization — after the election of May, 1913 — created a standing Committee of the City Council, known as the City Council Committee on Railway Ter- minals. This Committee took up for discussion the ordinance sub- mitted by the Union Station Company. In order to encourage the fullest possible consideration — not only of the Union Station ordi- nance, but of the general railway terminal problem in Chicago — this Committee invited all those interested to appear before it and present their views on the subject. As a result of this pro- gram, meetings were held several times a week during May and June, 1913, and a number of persons who had worked out schemes for the solution of the terminal problem appeared before this Com- mittee and were given every opportunity to present the merits of their respective plans. The officers of the Plan Commission submitted terminal plans based on study and analysis of the situation in the business district and congestion on the streets. These plans made many suggestions for the improvement of the street system in the central terminal dis- trict along the lines of the Chicago Plan. The original plans of Fred- eric A. Delano for the establishment of terminals at Twelfth Street, and plans prepared by Jarvis Hunt, Architect, Pond & Pond, Archi- tects, and Guenzel c^- Drummond, Architects, were also submitted. All of these j^laiis possessed ideas of merit and the public should appreciate the time, labor and expense so generously contributed towards a solution of the terminal problem. The presentation of these plans, together with the discussions relating thereto, extended over a period of several weeks and re- sulted in a typewritten record of over 1,500 pages. While these 3 hearings were of great value to the community, it was the general impression that an intelligent consideration of the subject by the City Council Committee on Railway Terminals would be materially assisted by having the great amount of information thus produced reviewed by an expert engineer or engineers. The City Club of Chicago — through its President, Alfred L. Baker — made a suggestion that the Committee create a commission of experts to report on the subject of railway terminals. Consideration was given to this suggestion by the Committee, but it finally reached the decision to engage John F. Wallace to make a report on the railway terminals of the City of Chicago, and on the effect the pending ordinance would have on the railway terminal situation. The Citizens' Terminal Plan Committee — representing disinter- ested citizens organized for the purpose of securing a broad investi- gation and study of railway terminals in Chicago — engaged Bion J. Arnold to make a comprehensive study and report on the general terminal situation and to review the plans submitted by the Com- mittee as well as the report of Mr. Wallace. Later it also retained Walter L. Fisher to represent it before the Council Committee. After receiving these reports, the Committee proceeded to a con- sideration and discussion of the problems involved. In addition to the members of the Committee and the representatives of the rail- roads interested, these conferences were participated in by John F. Wallace, Engineering Advisor of the City; Bion J. Arnold and Walter Fisher, representing the Citizens' Terminal Plan Committee ; Charles H. Wacker and his associates, Walter L. Moody, Frank I. Bennett, Edward H. Bennett and Paul Lazenby, of me Plan Commission of Chicago ; John W. Beckwith, Assistant Corporation Counsel (after- wards Corporation Counsel) ; Lawrence E. McGann, Commissioner of Public Works, and many citizens interested in a solution of the terminal situation. As a result of these conferences and hearings, what is known as the Union Station Ordinance and Pennsylvania Freight Ordinance were passed by the City Council on March 23, 1914, and afterwards accepted by the railroads interested. These ordinances — while securing to the railroads a location for their Union Station and freight facilities of undoubted value — also secured to the City substantial advantages and street improvements, many of them elements of the Chicago Plan, which cannot be meas- ured wholly by a commercial standard. Among these were the fol- lowing: 4 The widening of viaducts betweeen Canal Street and the River to the full width of the street at uniform grades ; The opening up of Monroe Street between Canal Street and the River; The widening of Canal Street and the establishment of a more uniform grade thereon; Provision for a double-decked connection between Canal Street and the North Side; Provision for the ultimate opening of Congress Street to the width contemplated in the Chicago Plan ; Agreement to co-operate in the straightening of the South Branch of the Chicago River. The abandonment of the proposed freight terminal of the Penn- sylvania between Jefferson and Desplaines Streets and the conse- quent more intensive development of the property situated between Canal Street and the River, will have a valuable effect in paving the way to a more intensive use of railroad property in other sections of the city and to a more complete development of the Chicago Plan. The provision in the ordinance for the straightening of the Chi- cago River between Polk and Sixteenth Streets has already been the means of bringing other railroads interested to a recognition of the advantages that would accrue in the straightening of the River, and may — in the near future — make possible the realization of this object, which is of such vital importance and interest to the City. The City Council Committee on Railway Terminals, the mem- bers of the City Council and the executive officers of the City Gov- ernment realized that the framing of the Union Station ordinace was but one step in the ultimate solution of the railway terminal problem in Chicago. The members of the City Council Committee on Railway Termi- nals felt that the engineers, lawyers and architects who had to do with these negotiations, had acquired a fund of general information and an experience which specially qualified them for carrying on the study of the railway terminal situation, and it was convinced that it would be a matter of good judgment and policy not only to provide for a Railway Terminal Commission which would continue the work started with these deliberations, but also that the persons who had been acting in an advisory capacity to the Committee — by reason of the experience which they had in the deliberations just closed — would be best fitted to carry on the work, and accordingly recommended to the City Council the resolution creating the Railway Terminal Commission. Shortly after its appointment, the Commission held a meeting for purposes of organization and to discuss a program for carrying out its future activities. As a rule, the City Council adjourns early in July for the sum- mer vacation. During this period it is also customary for the respon- sible heads of the railroads to absent themselves from Chicago more or less continuously, and it was brought to the attention of the Com- mission that — on account of these facts — its activities vy^ould be very much restricted during the summer months. The educational value of an inspection and study of terminal facilities in the larger cities of this country and Europe had been discussed by the Commission, and it had been suggested that the in- divdual members of the Commission might so arrange their vacation trips as to include an inspection of terminal facilities, both in this country and Europe. This suggestion w^as afterwards taken up by the City officials, and it was finally decided that it would be very desirable if the Commission as a body would formally undertake such an inspection, and this trip was made possible through the cor- dial co-operation of Mayor Harrison, who provided from his con- tingent appropriation for the expenses of the official representatives of the City. In discussing this proposed inspection, it became apparent that it would be desirable to have the Chairmen of the Committees of the City Council that would have jurisdiction over subjects likely to be affected by the findings of the Commission ; also, representatives of civic associations and representatives of steam roads and traction lines, accompany the Commission. It was accordingly arranged that — in addition to the members of the Commission — the party should be made up of the Chairmen of the following Committees of the City Council : Finance ; Local Industries ; Harbors. Wharves and Bridges ; and Streets and Alleys ; also, a representative of the Association of Commerce, of the City Club, and of steam railroads and traction lines. After the party was made up along these lines, it was decided by the Mayor that it would be desirable to have representatives of the Board of Education and the Chairman of the Committee on Health accompany the party and make independent investigations along lines of interest to them. After visiting Toronto, Montreal, Boston and New York, the party sailed for Europe in July, 1914, where an investigation of rail- road terminal and harbor facilities was made at Liverpool, Man- chester, London, Paris, Brussels and Antwerp. It was the plan of the Commission to visit Frankfort, Vienna, Budapest, Dresden, Berlin, Hamburg, Kiel, Copenhagen and Stock- holm, but on account of the outbreak of the war in Europe, soon after the party reached Belgium, it was necessary for it to return to London, where it disbanded. At all of the places visited every courtesy was extended to the Commission to facilitate its investigations. Numerous conferences were held with local officials and much profitable information se- cured. The practice of maintaining and operating independent railroad facilities serving the harbors of Liverpool, Manchester, London and Antwerp — which permitted all connecting railroads to reach the har- bor facilities on terms of absolute equality — impressed the Commis- sion as being applicable to any future plan of harbor development for Chicago. The Commission also learned that the officials in charge of rail- road operation in London had given serious consideration to the possibility of making such changes in their terminals as would per- mit the interchange of passenger traffic by rail between the various stations, so that the suburban trains entering one station could be routed through to stations of other railroads. It was stated by the General Manager of an English railroad — who was formerly General Superintendent of a railroad in the United States- — that such an arrangement would reduce congestion at East End stations at least 50 per cent ; that it would enable passengers arriving at the East End stations to continue on to the West End stations and vice versa ; and it was also stated that it would probably be found advantageous to extend this service so that it would be possible to inaugurate through routing of suburban trains. It was learned that part of the suburban service of London had been electrified ; that this electrical operation had been satisfactory and that the proposition to extend electrificatien to apply generally to the suburban traffic of the railroads was under consideration. In Paris it was found that through passenger trains were being routed through Paris to a limited extent and that some of the offi- cials were believers in the principle of through routing of trains; and the possibilities of making connections that would permit of through routing, were pointed out to the Commission, showing that this prin- ciple is receiving consideration. It was found in Brussels that a new station was under construc- tion with the intention of making possible through routing of trains, but in this case the application of through routing was being made 7 on account of local conditions which strongly favored this method of operation. Since returning to this country, the Commission — in addition to giving consideration to the several matters referred to it by various committees of the City Council — has given extended study to the railway terminal problem in Chicago, especially in its broader as- pects. Numerous sessions have been held in which the subject has been under discussion and at a number of these meetings responsible heads of the important railroads entering Chicago have been present and have discussed the subject quite freely. Individual members of the Commission have held extended in- terviews with representatives of railroads, shippers and general busi- ness interests and have reported to the Commission the facts, opinions and points of view brought out at these interviews. Due consideration has been given to the information gained by a study of the terminal situation in the other large cities of this country and of Europe and of the statistical information collected in reference to the Chicago terminals. As a result of this study and discussion, the Commission feels that it has sufficiently progressed in its investigations to be in a position to set forth in this preliminary report certain fundamental conclusions in regard to the solution of the railway terminal situation in Chicago, and outline in a general way some of the steps which may be taken at this time towards car- rying these conclusions into effect. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. The fundamentals of a correct railway terminal policy are that — so far as the character, location and operation of such terminals do effect or can effect these things — they shall Enable the railroads to handle their passenger and freight traffic in what will be to them the most economical and the most efficient manner; Enable shippers to receive and deliver freight, and passengers to reach and depart from trains, in what will be to them the cheapest, quickest and most convenient manner; Enable the general public to conduct its business with the least practicable congestion of the City's streets and the least practicable interference with the expansion of existing business districts and the development of new areas of commerce and industry ; Enable the City, as a whole, to recognize that above all it i^'' a place where many human beings live and labor,- and totMG establish and work out those plans of physical development — both residential and commercial — which, will most effec- tively conduce to the prosperity, health and happiness of its individual inhabitants. The modern city is created by commerce. Its prosperity and development depends upon commerce. Commerce depends upon transportation. Without efficient transportation modern commerce and the modern city are impossible. The most potent agency — the most essential agency — of commerce is the railway, because the railway is the greatest agency of transportation. The relations be- tw^een the city as a center of commerce and the railroads as an agency of commerce are reciprocal. Each depends upon the other and each must recognize the interests and the necessities of the other. It is the prime object and purpose of the Chicago Railway Terminal Com- mission to study this relationship as it exists in Chicago— with par- ticular reference to railway terminals — and to suggest the general principles and particular plans by w^hich the most effective co-opera- tion can be established for the promotion of the common interest. The chief object of any proper plan for the solution of the rail- way terminal problem must be to secure for the railroads and for those who use the railroads — passengers and the shippers or receivers of freight — the greatest efficiency and economy of terminal facilities and services. It is clear, however, that the greatest efficiency and economy are not secured if railway terminal facilities are not wisely located or operated ; if they are unnecessarily extended or duplicated ; if they needlessly interfere with the commercial or residential de- velopment of the city ; if, indeed, they fail to promote the commercial convenience and residential attractiveness of the City to the fullest extent that properly devised and operated transportation facilities can promote these interests. The most superficial examination of the railroad terminals of Chicago will show that they are neither located, constructed nor operated as efficiently or economically as they should be, whether viewed from the municipal or from the railroad point of view. In Chicago, as elsewhere, the present situation is largely the result of past conditions for which it would be profitless — even if it were pos- sible — to apportion the responsibility. Our problem is to deal with the situation as it is, and to point out how it can be improved. If all the railroads which enter the City of Chicago could be treated as one interest, and if we were now for the first time estab- lishing terminal tracks and facilities for these roads, the problem of outlining a system of railway terminals to connect the various centers of traffic within the City with the trunk lines at the City limits would be comparatively simple. Today, however, the chief usefulness of considering such a problem is to discover to what extent there is at present a needless, or least an uneconomic, complication of railroad terminal facilities within the City. If all of the railroads entering Chicago were owned and con- trolled by one interest, or were being operated with the sole view of producing as a whole the most efificient service and the largest net revenue, it is certain that the existing terminals and terminal ap- proaches would be simplified and consolidated and that property no longer needed for consolidated or unified operation — after making due allowance for the future growth of traffic — would be disposed of. The remaining properties would be utilized to their full capacity by using them for several — or all — lines instead of for one road, or for a few lines as at present. Unnecessary and complicated crossings would be eliminated and valuable real estate would be intensively improved. An ideal system of railway terminals cannot be substituted for the terminal tracks and facilities which already exist within the City. All of the railroads entering Chicago are not owned or con- trolled by a single interest. Neither these railroads nor their ter- minals can be operated with the sole view of producing as a whole the most efficient service and the largest net revenue. Nevertheless, the measure of the correctness of any solution of the terminal situation must be the nearness with which it approaches the ideal solution thus suggested. EFFECT OF COMPETITIVE THEORY. We have adopted in this country the principle of governmental regulation of privately owned railroads and that principle should logically be applied to the entire railroad situation. Its partial ap- plication has necessarily resulted at one time in treating the rail- roads as regulated monopolies and at another time in enforcing com- mercial competition between them. One or the other of these prin- ciples must give way. It is proving impossible to maintain a bal- ance between them. Even those who believe that we can still main- tain a certain degree of competition — while at the same time apply- ing the general principles of regulated monopoly — must concede that one or the other of these principles must be dominant. It must be apparent that in a business essentially monopolistic, efficiency and economy is to be found in the substitution of co-opera- tion under public regulation for at least that kind or degree of com- 10 petition which is destructive and wasteful. This applies to the whole field of railroading, including terminal facilities and services. Public statements have recently appeared from distinguished railroad officials, emphasizing the enormous waste due to the un- necessary and uneconomic duplication of freight and passenger facili- ties and services. Where there are several railroad routes between two points, it is a safe general deduction that — when distances, grades and other operating elements are compared — through traffic between these points can be moved most economically — and most efficiently — over one of these routes, to the extent of its reasonable capacity. Both the public and the railroads as a whole lose to the extent that any part of the traffic is moved at an unnecessary cost. In these days — when railroad rates are being increased with the approval of the Interstate Commerce Commission because the net revenues of the railroads as a whole are not regarded as adequate to sustain general railroad credit, as well as to pay fair dividends for individual roads — it is clear that, to the extent that traffic is not car- ried over the most economical line, the public is bearing an unneces- sary burden. The difficulty is that as long as each railroad is considered apart from all others and as a competitor of all others, each railroad seeks to obtain as much traffic as possible — certainly if it can be moved at any profit whatever to the particular road — even though the traffic thereby moves over longer distances and heavier grades than are encountered on other lines. Under this system the total traffic cost must be greater than is necessary and this unnecessary cost must be borne by the public. From the railroad point of view the remedy for this is the per- mission of "pooling," and under a system of publicly regulated but privately owned railroads, it may be that legalized pooling under effective public control is the best available device for maintaining a working balance between regulation and competition — and this gen- eral conclusion has its application to the terminal situation. European practice distinguishes the line haul from the terminal service and makes a separate charge for each. There are some indi- cations of a tendency towards the adoption of this practice in the United 'States. Assuming that each charge is fair and just for the service rendered, there may be distinct advantages in separating terminal charges from haul charges, especially if it leads to the treat- ment of each terminal area as a unit and its operation as a unit. 11 In the larger cities, such as Chicago, a single terminal company could undoubtedly operate a combined and co-operative terminal system with a substantial decrease of cost and increase of efficiency. The suggestion of such a system has recently appeared from railroad sources in Chicago. If a single terminal company should take over — by lease or oper- ating agreement — all of the existing terminals in a city like Chicago, an ideal terminal system could be approximated, and each of the ex- isting railroads could receive its due share of the operating results, if these results were divided in direct proportion to the value of the properties which the several companies would contribute to the com- mon terminal system. It may be that the intensive development of railroad terminals — by the construction of' warehouses and other buildings — could be more easily accomplished through the agency of a terminal company than if directly undertaken by the railroads them- selves. CO-OPERATIVE TERMINALS. With respect to terminal facilities and services, at least, the ad- vantages of competition seem negligible when compared with its dis- advantages. That the railroads themselves have recognized this with respect to passenger terminals is evidenced by the existence of Union Passenger Stations in so many of our larger cities throughout the country. An analysis of the situation will show not only that the same considerations that brought about the adoption of the Union Passenger Station apply to the terminal handling of freight, but that the very forces that brought about the Union Passenger Stations are today compelling favorable consideration of Union Freight Terminal plans. Union Passenger Stations were brought about because of the pressure of a constantly increasing passenger traffic upon the existing terminal facilities of individual roads and the necessity of locating the terminals in or near the centers of local population. Because of the high land values — largely created by the railroads themselves — in the very localities in which it was necessary, both for the convenience of the public and the advantage of the railroads, to locate the new stations, the cost of separate individual stations became so excessive that the advantages of co-operation were forced upon the recognition of the railroads and the public. The public recognized the conven- ience to it of co-operative terminal facilities for passenger traffic. The railroads recognized the economy to them and the increased efficiency of co-operative Union Passenger Stations. 12 In substituting co-operation for competition it was not always easy to overcome the; acquired or inherited ideas of an earlier era, and here and there competitive passenger terminals still survive in spite of what seem obvious disadvantages. So it has been, is, and will be in terminal handling of freight. Upon the one hand the pressure of the public and upon the other hand the necessities of the railroads will compel, first the consideration and then the gradual adoption of co-operative methods and facilities in the place of competitive meth- ods and facilities. Co-operation will not easily or quickly become universal. Com- petitive traditions and preferences will here and there survive. It is already clear, however, that the key to the solution of our railway terminal problem — with respect to freight as well as with respect to passengers — is to be found in the substitution of joint and co-oper- ative terminals for separate and competitive terminals; this substitu- tion to be brought about, not by some sudden or drastic adoption and execution of a complete revolutionary plan covering the whole rail- way terminal situation, but by such steps as may be taken from time to time with due regard to financial and operating conditions. Cer- tain important steps of this character undoubtedly can and should be taken at once or in the near future for the establishment of co-oper- ative terminals and the readjustment of existing terminals to con- form to correct principles of terminal development. But the essen- tial thing is that from now on no steps shall be taken in the opposite direction, thus creating unnecessary barriers to proper development in the future. The City should co-operate cordially in assisting the railroads in the execution of all plans that are in the right direction. It is clear that the continued application of the principle of com- petition in terminal development can only result in increasing the difficulties of any logical improvement in the terminal facilities of the City as a whole, and it is clear that the competitive principle is anything but economical from the point of view of railway operation. In any great industrial community such as Chicago, there develops not only one principal business district, but also outlying and widely separated local centers of industry and traffic requiring facilities of transportation and offering profitable returns to the railroads which furnish such facilities. If each railroad seeks to extend its own terminals not only into the central business district but also into each of the outlying local centers, it is apparent upon principle and demon- strated by experience that the result is unsatisfactory, both to the city and to the railroads as a whole. IS The complete application of the competitive system to railway freight terminals falls of its own weight. Each road cannot secure and maintain terminal facilities covering the entire terminal area of such a City as Chicago. It cannot secure, maintain and operate ade- quate terminal facilities in each and every section or district within the metropolitan terminal areas where important freight traffic is to be had. In many cases this is physically impracticable, and in many more cases it is financially impracticable. Nevertheless the attempt is made — under existing methods — to cover as much as possible of the entire field by separate and competitive terminals, with the re- sultant complication of facilities, and a financial investment not justi- fied by the revenue secured. In that portion of the field which a particular road is unable to reach with its own facilities, it nevertheless competes for all traffic that can be routed over its lines by having freight switched to or from it over the lines and with the equipment and force of the railroads which do physically connect with the points at which the freight is received or delivered. For these switching services, charges are made which the shipper naturally will not pay if he can route his freight over a road which has direct terminal connections and which, therefore, imposes no charges upon him. These charges are, there- fore, absorbed by the competing road which does not have direct terminal connections with the particular shipping district or section. All charges thus absorbed are taken out of the amount which such a roads receives from the shipper, which is the regular Chicago rate. This competition is so unrestrained, and — in particular instances ■ — apparently so uninformed, that the expense to the railroad of secur- ing freight in this manner often reduces the net receipts from such freight to a point where there is an actual excess of operating costs over the revenue received. In some instances there is an actual excess of absorbed switching charges alone over the total freight revenue received from particular shipments. In many cases where a railroad pushes its own terminals into particular districts where freight traffic is especially important, it is more than doubtful whether the traffic — thus divided between competitors — received by this railroad pays a justifiable return upon the cost of its separate competitive terminal and its maintenance and operation. In the terminal district of Chicago as a whole — and the same thing applies to other cities — the unnecessary complication of ter- minal facilities and operating costs is so extensive that it is appalling in its effect upon the railroads, the shippers and the public; and the future outlook along these lines is by -fliany — in and out of railroad 14 service — believed to be becoming worse and worse. The investments by railroads in unused or little used property to protect real or fan- cied competitive positions or interests, is also a source of great ex- pense to the railroads and ultimately to the public — although not often fully realized as such. The interest on these investments is absorbed in the general interest charges on the entire property and is thus lost sight of as being an expense due to unproductive invest- ments, nor is due allowance made for the natural accretion in the value of such property, which is often withheld from profitable use for considerable periods of time. , If the terminal situation were treated co-operatively instead of competitively, there would be an immediate simplification of the tan- gled network of tracks that now exist; the release for general com- mercial purposes of much valuable property now held by railroads for present competitive purposes or prospective competitive needs ; the reduction of operating costs in the terminal handling of freight and the increase of efficiency. To the public this would mean not only the improvement of the service to the shippers, but the reduction of the street congestion and the removal of existing obstacles to the growth and development of the City, PASSENGER SERVICE. The recognition of the foregoing principles has made greater progress with respect to passenger service than it has with respect to freight service, and, fortunately, in a large city passenger terminals can advantageously be separated from freight terminals. A single Union Passenger Station, even if principally devoted to through passenger service, should not be made so large or embrace so many roads that its very size reduces its advantages below those that would come from dividing the service between two or more Union Stations, each serving fewer roads. There is a point at which size becomes so unwieldly that it destroys or seriously lessens the advantages of combination, but short of this result the principle of co-operation should, in general, be applied to the passenger service, although local stations may still be found necessary or convenient for particular localities. THROUGH ROUTING. The advantages to the railroads, as well as to the public, of co-operative passenger terminals, would be more generally recog- nized if it were not for the mistake which has heretofore been made 16 in many Union Passenger Stations, of erecting- monumental build- ings, not only for their imposing architectural effect, but also to pro- vide combined accommodations for through passengers and suburban passengers in the same building. It is seriously questioned whether railroad companies are justi- fied in imposing upon the traveling public the burden of costs due to unnecessary ornamental or monumental architecture, and the huge size of many Union Passenger Stations could be materially reduced by recognizing the different necessities of the suburban and the through service. The two classes of service do not desire or require the same accommodations. Each would be better served if given separate accommodations more directly adapted to its needs. By through routing suburban passenger trains instead of oper- ating them into and out of stub-end terminals as at present, the bur- den of the suburban ^ervice upon the railroads would be lessened and the value of the service to the public would be increased. The suburban service is, in many respects, more nearly related to the service performed by street and interurban railway lines than to the through service of the steam railroads, and these various ser- vices can be co-ordinated with great advantage and in a manner to secure a more intensive utilization of existing rights of way. Railroad officials have — in many instances — been deterred from favoring Union Passenger Stations because of fixed charges and operating costs due to the failure to recognize the foregoing limita- tions of size and cost. FREIGHT SERVICE. The principle of co-operative terminal facilities and services should be applied to the freight traffic as well as to the passenger traffic. Instructive applications of this principle are to be found in '■he operations of the Minnesota Transfer Railway at Minneapolis and *^t. Paul and the operations at Clearing in Chicago. Both of these enterprises are clearly demonstrating their advantages to the public ''^d to the railroads. The original purpose and the present principle business of both these enterprises is the handling of interchange car- load freight outside of the congested areas of the cities in or near which they are respectively located, so that such freight which is not intended for consumption or use within these congested areas need not enter these areas at all. The obvious advantages and economy of this principle are so clear that it would seem to be axiomatic and vet it has received only a limited and reluctant application in Ameri- can railroading. 10 This principle should clearly be extended so as to cover all of the traffic of the railroads entering larger centers of population and it would probably be found to be of universal application. A system embodying the same general principles should undoubtedly be applied to the interchange of less than carload (L. C. L.) freight. A start in the application of this principle as pertaining to carload freight has been made in Chicago at Clearing, where twelve railroads now co-operate in the interchange of carload freight. Af the Minnesota Transfer at Minneapolis, this principle has been applied not only to carload freight but to the L. C. L. freight, and during the year ending August 31, 1914, there was transferred 145,874 tons (2.91% of the total business) of L. C. L. freight. Of this L. C. L. freight transfer, 85% was through interchange freight and 15% was city freight. LESS THAN CARLOAD FREIGHT. Much of the existing congestion and terminal expense is due to the attempt to load outbound L. C. L. freight into schedule cars at the central freight stations. The increase of traffic at these points causes the congestion of the city streets to the delay and expense of the shipper and the inconvenience of the public. The freight stations and team tracks become congested beyond the point of economical operation, and their area or capacity is increased at abnormal and unjustifiable expense to the railroads. Many, if not all, of these dis- advantages would be obviated by loading outbound L. C. L. freight at the receiving stations or team tracks directly into trap cars to be taken in these cars to outlying stations or yards located upon less valuable property a*nd equipped especially for the sorting and sched- ule loading of L. C. L. freight.* This principle is already being successfully and profitably applied by certain of the larger railroads to portions, at least, of the L. C. L. freight at Chicago, Minneapolis, St. Paul and elsewhere, and it is confidently believed that increased advantages would arise from the co-operation of all the railroads in establishing and operating one or more outlying clearing plants or yards at which outgoing L. C. L. *William H. Lyford, General Counsel for the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad Company, in an address before the Chicago Engineers' Club — which was introduced in evidence before the Interstate Commerce Commission at a recent hearing in Chicago — stated that E. H. Lee, Vice-President and Chief Engineer of the Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad Company, estimates "the present average cost of transfer freight under present methods at $2.61 per ton, and the entire cost of adopting the clearing method will be $1.15 per ton, thus saving $1.46 per ton, or 56%, which, when applied to the 6,000 tons of transfer freight handled 300 days in the year, amounts to $2,622,000." 17 freight can be assembled, interchanged and loaded into schedule cars. The extent to which this system should be applied to all L. C. L. freight should be determined by local conditions and by limitations established by experience. Whether all outgoing L. C. L. freight in a city as large as Chicago should be brought to a single outlying clear- ing station raises the same question of size limitation above dis- cussed with reference to Union Passenger Stations. It may be that two or more such clearing stations or yards — prop- erly located to receive and handle freight destined for the different districts or parts of the country into which freight traffic and the existing railroad systems naturally subdivide it in their relations to a particular city — would be more advantageous than a single clearing station of this character. UNIVERSAL FREIGHT STATIONS. This Commission is convinced that the co-operative principle should be applied by the establishment in the centers of trafific of at least a certain number of universal freight receiving stations for out- bound L. C. L. freight, so that shippers may deliver to these stations for all the railroads or for properly classified groups of railroads. This would greatly reduce the amount of teaming and the street con- gestion that results from unnecessary teaming. There is some question as to whether the universal station will increase the cost to the railroads of handling outbound L. C. L. freight. This Commission is not convinced that it would increase the net cost to the railroads, but if it is demonstrated that the cost of handling freight at such universal freight houses is greater than at the central receiving stations of the individual roads, shippers utiliz- ing the universal stations and thus reducing their teaming cost, might be appropriately required to pay a proper charge in addition to the regular Chicago freight rate. This matter can safely be left to be de- termined by experience and to be regulated by the Interstate Com- merce Commission and the State Public Utilities Commission. THE TWO-LEVEL PLAN. This Commission believes that serious consideration should be given to the advantages of the two or more level plan in the future development of freight facilities in congested areas. This plan in- creases the capacity of a given area considerably over 100%, depend- ing upon the nature of the plan used. It permits the utilization of greater space for standing teams and trucks and makes possible the 18 opening of thoroughfares over property devoted to railroad uses upon the lower level, thus increasing the value of these very facilities for the receipt and delivery of freight. INTENSIVE DEVELOPMENT. By receiving inbound freight upon the upper level and delivering inbound freight upon the lower level, the expense of raising or low- ering freight upon two levels can be reduced and economies in truck- ing can be effected by intelligent design.* The logical extension of this plan is undoubtedly the utilization of the space above the ter- minals so as to reduce the fixed charges against the freight handling facilities. Exceedingly instructive developments of this general principle are being made in New York City. It is estimated that the New York Central and its partner, the New York, New Haven & Hartford, have invested $9,600,000 in commercial buildings on portions of the ter- minal area in New York City. The New Haven is merely a tenant of the railroad facilities, but is a partner in the commercial develop- ment of the terminal area. Lessees of building sites also have as- sisted in financing construction to the extent of $1,000,000, and the- *Mr. E. H. Lee, Vice President and Chief Engineer of the Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad, in a paper presented to the American Railway Engineering Association, in discussing the possibilities of two level freight houses, sums up the advantages and disadvantages as follows: 1. Diminishes the investment in land; 2. Adds to the cost of the improvement; 3. Is especially feasible on side hill locations, or where grades are sep- arated; 4. Saves the space sometimes used for inclines between streets and drive- ways; 5. Improves the street system, making the freight houses more accessi- ble; 6. Decreases the operating cost by shortening the trucking distance and by utilizing the operating forces; 7. Adds to the operating cost the item of elevating or dropping freight. In discussing these items, Mr. Lee uses a basis of 2,000 square feet per car for single level development, and 1,350 square feet for two level develop- ment, and states that it may be possible to make a double level development with a capacity of 1,000 square feet per car. Studies made by this Commis- sion indicate that this area can be considerably reduced below 1,000 square feet. Mr. Lee shows, however, under his assumptions that the cost of a single level plan at $1.00 per square foot and a double level plan at $4.00 per square foot — the land value taken at $10.00 per square foot — is a saving of 17% in the cost of improvements; land value at $15.00 per square foot a saving of 20%, and land value at $20.00 per square foot, a saving of 26%. Mr. Lee discusses the possibility of reducing the trucking system by the more compact arrangement possible in the two level plan and gives his con- clusions as follows: "Double decking, by decreasing both the investment per car and the operating expense — as it also adapts itself to grade separation — is a logical method of improvement. Its adoption for city L. C. L. freight terminals may be expected to become more general as conditions demand." 19 application of this principle is to be extended. The figures given do not include the head house, which constitutes what is usually re- 'garded as the railroad station. The Boston News Bureau in a recent analysis of the financial operations of the New York Central during the past ten years says : "It is necessary to preserve the sharp distinction between expenditures in this terminal area for railroad facilities and for commercial or real estate development. The latter not only do not increase the financial burden on the railroad, but will even- tually lift from it the larger part, if not all, the ground rent for what is probably the most expensive large terminal site in the world. Leases of these buildings or of space for the erection of buildings are made to provide that tenants not only pay inter- est on the value of the land, but in the course of years amortize the cost of the buildings themselves. Rent of the ground cov- ered by the station and office buildings, it is true, will for the present fall upon the railroad, though the 'head house' is so con- structed that offices may be reared above it to a height of 22 stories, while the six-story office buildings can be similarly built upward, when the demand for floor space in this vicinity justifies such a step." The adoption of such principles as the foregoing would reduce the amount of expensive property necessary to be acquired and held by the railroads for terminal purposes, and would not only justify but provide an incentive for the industrial development of the termi- nal properties retained by the railroads in the various business, manu- facturing or industrial districts. It is for the interest of the public — as well as of the railroads — that terminal properties now only superficially utilized for tracks or freight houses should be developed over these facilities for ware- house, manufacturing or other purposes, so as to make this very valuable property produce a proper revenue and afford the merchants and manufacturers the great advantages of rentable space in build- ings directly connected with terminal facilities. The Cupples Ware- house in St. Louis is an interesting example of such development. ELECTRIFICATION. A railroad company not only finds it unnecessary to conduct both its freight and its passenger business at the same terminal location or over the same terminal tracks, but it usually discovers operating advantages in the separation of freight and passenger terminals. This is of great practical importance in preparing for the electrification of railway terminals. Both the railroads and the public are looking forward to the substitution of some less objectionable motive power 20 for the present steam locomotive, especially in the operation of passen- ger terminals and terminal tracks. The Committee on Smoke Abatement and Electrification of the Chicago Association of Commerce has — for more than four years — been making a detailed study of this question, and its report is soon expected. Without anticipating the findings of this report, it seems safe to assume from the evidence generally available, that electricity — applied either by means of the overhead trolly or by means of the third rail direct contact system — is the only motive power other than steam that has demonstrated its practicability for such extensive ap- plication as would be necessary at Chicago. It is apparent that the cost of electrification will be greatly re- duced by simplifying and unifying the passenger tracks entering the city ; by removing the present tangle of cross lines ; by establish- ment of direct instead of roundabout routes within the city ; and by the joint use of tracks available for and adequate for more railway companies than those which now utilize these particular tracks. The adoption of outlying co-operative freight stations would greatly simplify the electrification of the more central freight terminals and tracks. THE CHICAGO TERMINAL SITUATION. The very geographic and topographic conditions which have caused the development of Chicago as a railroad and commercial center has conduced to complicate its railroad terminal situation. Located in a level country, on the western shore of Lake Michi- gan, there have been no physical obstacles to the location of railroad approaches except directly from the East. The railroad lines of the West and Northwest have naturally converged at the southern end of Lake Michigan as the most convenient point for the inter- change of traffic betwen these lines and the lines serving the East. Here at Chicago most of the great railroad systems of the country converge. Each of these roads has sought a separate entrance to the City and has endeavored to secure terminal facilities as extensive and as advantageously located from a competitive point of view as those possessed by the roads that have preceded it. There being no physical obstacle to overcome — on account of the uniform level of the City — each road has been actuated solely by motives of expediency in locating its terminals. It has been the line of least resistance — financially considered — which has chiefly deter- mined the location in most cases. Inasmuch as most of the roads were located during the era when grade crossings were tolerated by 21 the public and advocated by the railroads because of the immediate economy, the result has been a perfect maze of terminal approaches crossing each other and leading into the very heart of the city. RAILROADS IN THE CITY PLAN. The physical development of a city is largely affected by the arrangement of the railroad lines and the distribution of the railroad properties. These lines and properties, laid dow^n through open country when the city was young and small in area, have had a strong influence in determining the direction and character of the growth of the city. The establishment of railroads without proper provision for the extension of streets and highways across their rights-of-way and yards, has a retarding effect on the spread of the city into outer areas. This is especially true of Chicago in certain dis- tricts and has tended to produce its scattered and uneven .develop- ment. These railroad locations have determined — to a large extent — the use to which adjacent property is put. They attract industries along the right-of-way, and the more numerous they are the more scattered and spread out these industries become. This industrial develop- ment has, in turn, influenced the residential development in its neigh- borhood and between the different lines of railroad. The multiplicity of railroad entrances into Chicago has led to the cutting up of the City into many comparatively small areas given over partly to industry and partly to residence. The multiplicity of lines has led to numerous large yard and terminal areas which form barriers to symmetrical development. For example, in the large yards of the Burlington and North Western Railroads, there is a total absence of north and south streets for the half mile between Western Avenue and Robey Street, and in the next half mile east there are only four north and south streets and these pass under the yards by tunnel. As the railroad lines converge towards the center of the City and towards the downtown terminals, the greater becomes the in- tensity and importance of the effect of the conditions discussed above. These lines — coming closer together- — consequently have their yards and terminals closer together until, in the center of the City, we find the business heart completely surrounded by railroad yards and ter- minals.* *F. A. Delano, in "Political Economy," Vol. XXI, No. 9, November, 1913, writes: "In spite of the apparent chaos, a study of the question develops the fact that, on the whole, the arrangement is more orderly than was at first 22 The central business district, represented by the area south of the main Chicago River, north of Twelfth Street and between the south branch of the River and Lake Michigan, is substantially one mile square. It is not only hemmed in on all sides by railway freight and passenger terminals, but is penetrated for about half of this dis- tance by terminal approaches from the south. Only the area north of" Van Buren Street and about a quarter of a mile square is really free from railway occupation and within this area are crowded the active centers of the financial, retail and whole- sale business; the public buildings of the National Government, the City and the County; the State and Federal Courts; the principal hotels and the great office buildings. Within this narrow limit the street and elevated railways focus the greater portion of their traffic. Although this district is now less than half built up with modern commercial buildings, the conditions of traffic on the streets con- stitutes a serious obstacle to business and to the further development of the commerce of the city. The railway terminal holdings in this district are largely respon- sible for this congestion ; first, because they prevent expansion, and, second, because they concentrate the greater portion of their own traffic within these narrow limits. In their discussion of the terminal question, the officers of the Chicago Plan Commission showed that the streets serving as ap- proach to this business district were totally inadequate. While there are nine north and south streets entering the central district from the north, the approaches from the south are limited to four, one of which — Alichigan Boulevard^ — is not open to heavy traffic and an- other — Clark Street — has been narrowed by encroachments and its use considerably restricted by the grades due to the viaducts over railroad tracks. North of Van Buren Street there are eight east and west streets running continuously through the business district. South of Van Buren Street — and from there to Twelfth Street — there is really only suspected, and that the twenty-three railway lines approaching Chicago group themselves, as they approach the heart of the City, into seven well-defined arteries. Between these main railway arteries is a network of streets, some of them carrying an enormous volume of traffic which converge into a con- stricted business district. "That the main features of this anatomy are intimately inter-related, no one can deny; and, while the main railway and street arteries cannot be greatly altered, there are undoubtedly opportunities to modify and supplement them. "Diagrammatically, the relations of the North and South Sides of Chicago might be likened to the two halves of an hour glass joined by the central and constricted neck; on one side might be shown the neck, on the other, adjacent but detached, the West Side, the greatest both in area and in population of the city's three sections." 23 one east and west street that is continuous — Harrison Street. All the other east and west streets in this section are closed or obstructed either by railroad tracks and freight houses or by a high wall as on Polk and Taylor Streets at Fifth Avenue. The street conditions in the area just to the south of the central district — i. e., south of Twelfth Street — are equally bad. From Twelfth Street to Twenty-second Street there is only one continuous east and west street and only four north and south streets, one of which is obstructed. Not only is the River an obstacle to the free development of the b-usiness district toward the north and west, but the location of important railway terminals along the River has increased this ob- stacle, especially towards the west. While some east and west thor- oughfares are extended through these terminals, the superficial char- acter of the occupation of these areas by railroad tracks and low freight houses necessarily breaks the continuity of commercial devel- opment. ' By unduly confining the areas within which business is con- ducted and adequate transportation facilities afforded, the railroads are injuring themselves as well as the City. The railroads of Chi- cago do furnish extensive facilities throughout the entire terminal area, but these facilities are not now properly correlated. With not- able exceptions they are operated so as to increase rather than dimin- ish the central congestion.* It is realized that in bringing about better conditions — both in the central sections of the City and in the outlying districts and also in the areas which will in the future be incorporated into the City — other means will have to be found which will be simpler and more practicable than the complete rearrangement and unification of the railroad entrances. *Mr. F. A. Delano, in "Political Economy," Vol. XXI, No. 9, November, 1913, writes: "Obviously, one of the major problems of the Chicago Plan was to enlarge the passageway between the North and South Sides through the business dis- trict, and at the same time bring the West Side into closer and more vital connection. The way the Plan proposed to accomplish this has been, perhaps, sufficiently illustrated, but its five principles may be here mentioned for con- venience: 1 — Enlarging the business area by pushing the railway stations south to Twelfth Street; 2 — Straightening the river so as to open at least three new north and south streets; 3 — Widening Twelfth Street and creating a wide Congress Street, to bring the West Side into closer and more intimate connection with the city's heart; A — Widening Halsted Street — the principal west side street — and making it one side of the city's inner quadrangle; 5 — Establishing the city's future civic center on the West Side. 24 It is exceedingly desirable that outlying centers of business should be built up independently of the central business district; but it is inevitable that there shall be one principal business center in every city. There is a sound and compelling reason for the fact that in every successful City there is one principal center of trade and commerce. Any attempt to break up and scatter the business which naturally should be brought together within this district, and which cannot be so economically or efficiently conducted if it is not concentrated at one point, can only result in impairing the commer- cial prosperity of the City. On the other hand, it is directly con- trary to the public interests and to the railroad interests to con- centrate in the central business district any business or traffic that can be as well or better conducted in other sections of the City. It is the part of wisdom — both for the city itself and for the rail- roads whose interests are identified with the interests of the city — to provide for the normal and healthful development, not only of the principal business center, but also of the larger terminal area of each metropolitan community. PRESENT METHODS OF HANDLING MERCHANDISE FREIGHT. The central railroad terminal district of Chicago may be taken to include all that territory east of Desplaines Street and between Eighteenth Street and Chicago Avenue — an area of less than four miles square. In this territory there are located fifty-seven freight houses for inbound and outbound merchandise (L. C. L.) freight, through which is handled daily 84% of the total merchandise L. C. L. freight of the city.* From information furnished by the railroads, it appears that about 10,000 tons of L. C. L. freight originating in Chicago is shipped out each day. Of this freight 3,000 tons are received in trap cars from industry sidings and 7,000 tons are received at the outbound houses by team, tunnel and lighter. The greater portion of the trap car freight is brought from the industry sidings into the congested dis- tricts and is there sorted and loaded by the railroads into schedule cars. In addition to the 10,000 tons of L. C. L. outbound freight which originates in the City, the railroads of Chicago daily bring into their inbound freight houses approximately 10,000 tons of L. C. L. freight, of which 5,000 tons is transferred to the outbound houses of other *See Exhibit "I" for list of principal freight and passenger stations in Chicago. 25 railroads. Of this transfer, 45 per cent is made by team, to the added congestion of the streets in the central terminal district.* In the very center of the City — in the narrow district lying be- tween Harrison Street and Sixteenth Street and between State Street and the Chicago River — are located the freight terminals of twelve railroads, at which are handled daily 4,700 tons of inbound L. C. L. freight, of which 1,350 tons are transferred to other railroads.** These same stations handle daily about 4,800 tons of outbound L. C. L. freight, of which 2,200 tons are received from other roads. The average daily number of freight cars — both inbound and out- bound — is 1,425, while the car standing capacity of the inbound and outbound houses at any one time is 1,270 cars. If all the transfer and trap car freight were eliminated from these terminals, it would mean — on a basis of present business- — a re- duction of nearly 40 per cent in the tonnage ofl freight necessarily handled in these terminals, and a still further reduction in the re- quired car standing capacity, because this transfer and trap car busi- ness requires double the car standing capacity that is required for the straight city freight — qualified, however, to the relatively small extent to which it is possible to use for outbound loading the car in which the transfer freight is received. The reduction of 40 per cent in freight tonnage mentioned above would provide for the natural growth of business for a considerable period of years, and if accompanied by the proper co-operative use of terminals, would permit the sale of much valuable property now superficially used for terminal purposes. PRESENT SUPERFICIAL USE OF TERMINAL PROP- ERTIES. The need for more intensive development of railroad freight terminal property has become quite apparent to those who have given serious consideration to the subject. Railroad ofificials have been *William H. Lyford, in testimony presented to the Interstate Commerce Commission at a recent hearing in Chicago, gives the following facts relative to the average daily L. C. L. business in Chicago: "The Chicago railroads daily bring into this City 10,000 tons of L. C. L. freight and take out 16,000 tons. Of the inbound freight only 40 per cent is delivered to the consignees by the inbound road. The remaining 60 per cent, or 6,000 tons, is taken out of the inbound cars at the terminal station of the road on which it arrives, and is transferred to the terminal stations of other roads; and 24.8 per cent of this transfer is made by teams, 68.6 per cent by trap cars and 6.6 per cent by tunnel." **A. T. & S. Fe. Grand Trunk C. & E. Pere Marquette Rock Island C. & E. I. Nickle Plate Monon B. & O. Lake Shore C. G. W. Wabash 26 brought to realize the value of this intensive development when they are confronted with the necessity of securing additional real estate in the congested business districts of the City where land values are high. It should be equally apparent that the limited use to which valu- able real estate is put is just as much an unnecesary expense as would be an expenditure for additional unnecessary property. Exactly to the extent that real estate of this character is unnecssarily held out of commercial use by the railroad, is the potential freight producing capacity of the areas adjacent to their terminals reduced, and this injurious effect is increased to the extent that the superficial and unat- tractive improvement of their own property deters the elTective de- velopment of adjacent property. CHICAGO RIVER STRAIGHTENING. The straightening of the Chicago River is — in many respects — the most important single step that can be taken for the improvement of the central terminal area. The proposal — for which a certain amount of co-operation has already been assured^is for a direct chan- nel between Polk Street and Dodge Street, which would permit the extension of Franklin Street and streets east of Franklin as north and south thoroughfares. Practically all of the property involved is already owned by the railroads. The present curve or bend in the River channel south of Twelfth Street makes it exceedingly difficult to properly develop the land lying between Dodge Street and the River. By straightening the River this land and the land lying between Clark Street and the present river channel would be capable of harmonious development along normal rectangular lines. On account of its more direct course, the straightened river would occupy 194,000 square feet less than is now occupied by the present river channel, thus creating an addition to the available areas in this district of approximately 4>4 acres. The value of this addi- tional acreage would probably be more than suflficient to pay for the actual construction work of straightening the river, to say nothing of the increase of values due to making property which now lies west of the River available for the central business district. The present area lying between Clark Street and the east bank of the Chicago River amounts to about 870,000 square feet, but it is narrowed down at its center to a little more than 100 feet in width. With the river straightened, there would be available between Clark Street and the River a tract of land over 1,000 feet wide and over 27 2,600 feet long, containing 2,600,000 square feet, which is an area considerably in excess of the combined areas occupied for freight facilities today by all of the railroads north of Sixteenth Street or between the river and State Street. With proper co-operation between the railroads of this district, it should be possible to develop in this teritory between Clark Street and the straightened river, amply sufficient facilities to provide for the present needs and probable future requirements of all the rail- roads in this district, thereby releasing for commercial use all — or certainly the greater portion — of the property now held by railroads between Clark Street and State Street. It would then be possible, also, to open through this terminal territory all — or practically all — of the north and south streets with- out interfering with the use of the property for railroad purposes. The adjustment of the plane of these streets to meet the plane of the viaducts or bridges across the river would place the streets sufficiently high to permit of railroad operation beneath them, with- out placing the railroad tracks at too low an elevation. In the tentative plans which are submitted herewith, alternative' propositions have been developed showing various possibilities of re- adjusting the freight terminals in this district on the basis of the two level plan for freight handling with warehouse operation. In all these plans the effort has been made to secure the elimi- nation of present railroad grade crossings and the opening up of streets for uninterrupted traffic without interference with railroad development. SUMMARY OF GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS. In the interests of the City, the railroads, the shippers and the general public, the railroad terminals now existing in the congested area bounded by the Lake on the east, Chicago Avenue on the north, Desplaines Street on the west and Sixteenth Street on the south, should be readjusted and simplified by combination and co- operation. The through passenger service of all the railroads now using terminals in that portion of the congested area above described, which lies east of the south branch of the Chicago River, should be combined in one — or two — Union Passenger Stations, with the excep- tion of such of these roads as can properly be taken into the new Canal Street Union Station west of the River Advantage should be taken of the substantial opportunities which now exist for the practical application of the through routing principle to Chicag-o suburban service. These opportunities would be increased by certain changes which are easily practicable. The present extensive and superficially spread out competitive freight terminals within the congested area — bounded as above de- scribed — should be regrouped and simplified. The Commission is gratified to be able to report that it has found — on the part of a num- ber of influential railroad officials — a distinctly favorable disposition toward this suggestion and a willingness to assist in the working out of practicable plans to carry it into eflfect. The Commission has been preparing a number of tentative alter- native plans to this end, to be used as a basis of discussion and study. It presents a number of such plans herewith, with accompanying ex- planations of their character and effect. The south branch of the Chicago River should be straightened so that La Salle Street, Fifth Avenue and Franklin Street can be extended through as continuous north and south thoroughfares, and so that railroad properties now cut off by the river and only super- ficially used, can be made available for intensive development. Provision for river-straightening was made in the Canal Street Union Station ordinance, and the Commission has secured assent to substantially similar provisions in the Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad ordinance, passed February 19, 1915, and in the pending ordinances relating to the Chicago & Western Indiana Rail- road. Other railroads— whose interests would be affected — have also indicated to the Commission their willingness to co-operate in some practicable plan of river straightening. The Commission has prepared certain tentative plans showing the river straightened and how the property then thrown east of the south branch of the River can be utilized to the joint advantage of the railroads and the public. No carload freight should be handled within the congested area — bounded as above — except that which is intended for consumption or use within the district. All other carload freight should be inter- changed, transferred or delivered by co-operative methods, agencies and facilities outside of this district, such as those already adopted at Clearing by twelve of the Chicago railroads, operating fifteen trunk lines. The Clearing Yard is located between Seventy-third and Central Park Avenues, and between Sixty-seventh and Seventy-third Streets, and is connected with both the inner and the outer Belt Railway Sys- tems at the nearest point of approach of these systems to each other. 29 Both eastern and western railways co-operate with each other at Clearing; but at present only carload freight is handled there. Here — or at similar co-operative yards — should be interchanged all carload freight which it is not essentially necessary to handle within the congested area. Less than carload (L. C. L.) freight should be interchanged or transferred — as far as practicable — on general principles substantially similar to those applied at Clearing to the carload freight. It is apparent that — to the extent that this interchange or trans- fer can be accomplished at one or more points outside of the con- gested area of the city — a distinct public benefit will be conferred, and the railroads themselves will probably be financially benefited. Outbound L. C. ■ L. freight should not — as a general rule — be sorted or loaded to destination at the freight terminals within the con- gested area. No outbound L. C. L. freight which had been loaded into trap cars on private sidings should be brought into this congested area, but should be taken directly from the point of origin to an out- lying station or yard, where it will be transferred as may be necessary. Outbound L. C. L. freight brought by teams or trucks to freight stations or team tracks within the congested area should be un- loaded as directly as practicable from the vehicles into trap cars and should be taken in these trap cars directly to outlying clearing sta- tions or yards, there to be transferred as may be necessary. What — if any — exceptions should be made with respect to specially expedited freight depends upon operating conditions and developments. Outlying L. C. L. clearing stations or yards should be estab- lished and operated by roads which do not already have them ; and the co-operative or union principle should be applied and extended as rapidly as experience justifies and opportunity permits. This Commission is not now prepared to say that the larger railroad systems may not find it advantageous to operate individual clearing station yards of their own or that one joint station or clear- ing yard may be found as efficient as two or more. It may be that there should be three union co-operative clearing stations or yards, located in dififerent sections of the outlying terri- tory of Chicago and devoted to freight destined west and northwest, south and southwest, east and southeast, the sections into which the entire railroad system — when considered in relation to Chicago — nat- urally subdivides the country. Universal freight stations should be established at appropriate points in the central terminal area, in sufficient number to afford 30 convenient opportunity for the shippers in the respective sections of this area to deliver at a single station L. C. L. freight destined to different roads, or at least to any of the roads within one of the above mentioned groups. The freight received at such universal stations should be taken to the outlying clearing station or yard of all the roads, or of the roads of one of these groups — depending on the system — and then this freight should be sorted, transferred and loaded to destination. In the event — but only in the event — that this service is found to involve extra expense to the railroads over the cost to them of handling freight teamed to their respective individual receiving sta- tions, the shipper utilizing these universal stations should pay an appropriate charge for the privilege which enables him, to reduce the cost and the delays of teaming. It is not suggested at this time that all the railroads should im- mediately adopt the universal freight station system, or that each railroad should convert all of its existing freight stations into uni- versal stations. But it is believed that a sufficient beginning should be made on the universal freight station plan to give that plan a fair and adequate trial, and under circumstances which will permit of its extension to the extent that this is justified by experience. The Commission is confident that experience will demonstrate the practical value of the Universal Freight House System, both to the railroad and the public. In the plans prepared by this Commission, as tentative studies of the terminal situation, locations have been indicated for new universal freight houses by way of suggesting where such houses be located. In actually working out the problems, other locations may be found more suitable or more available. The Commission has been gratified to find that the Universal freight house principle is being given friendly consideration by Chicago railroad men, and it confidently hopes for the inauguration of this principle in the near future. None of the plans herewith submitted is intended to represent the matured judgment of the Chicago Railway Terminal Commis- sion. The sole purpose of all that is here presented is to report progress toward the solution of the railway terminal problem and to indicate some of the practical steps that may lead further in this direction. Acknowledgment is due to the assistance rendered the Com- mission in the study of the terminal situation and the preparation of 31 this report by Edward J. Noonan, Secretary and Principal Engineer, and his staff, Donald B. Rush, Frank E. Collins, and Ralph J, Hinkle. Respectfully submitted, CUXCAGO RAILWAY TERMINAL COMmsSION Chairman. Chicago, March 24, 1915. 32 EXHIBIT I PRESENT TERMINAL FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF CHICAGO EXHIBIT I PRESENT TERMINAL FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF CHICAGO The railway approaches to the City of Chicago are along seven different routes, as follows : 1 — The Illinois Central right-of-way along the Lake Front; 2 — The Lake Shore-Rock Island right-of-way, parallel to Clark Street ; 3 — The Pennsylvania-Western Indiana right-of-way between Stewart Avenue and Canal Street ; 4 — The Illinois Central-Santa Fe-Alton right-of-way parallel to Archer Avenue ; 5 — The Burlington-Northwestern-Baltimore & Ohio right-of- • way parallel to Sixteenth Street; 6 — The St. Paul-Pan Handle-Northwestern right-of-way par- allel to Kinzie Street ; 7 — The Northwestern right-of-way parallel to Milwaukee Avenue. Of these seven, four are east and south of the River, while three are north and west of the River. There are — at the present time — six railway passenger terminals in the City, namely: Northwestern Station, Union Station, La Salle Street Station, Grand Central Station, Dearborn Station, Central Station. 33 These stations accomodate railroads as follows : NORTHWESTERN : .... 1 road : Chicago & Northwestern ; UNION 5 roads LA SALLE : 4 roads GRAND CENTRAL: 5 roads: DEARBORN : 8 roads Chicago & Alton, Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Ft. Wayne & Chicago Chicago, Indiana & Southern, Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific, Lake Shore & Michigan Southern, New York, Chicago & St. Louis. Baltimore & Ohio, Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Ter- minal, Chicago Great Western, Pere Marquette, Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe, , Chesapeake & Ohio, Chicago & Eastern Illinois, Chicago & Erie, Chicago & Western Indiana. Chicago, Indianapolis & Louis\^ille, Grand Trunk, Wabash. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis, Michigan Central, Illinois Central. TOTAL : 26 roads. The Northwestern Station, occupying the entire block between Canal and Clinton Streets, fronting on Madison Street, is a new structure, costing $25,000,000. and should meet the requirements of through traffic for many years. There are 16 stub tracks and 6 main line elevated approach tracks. The Union Station, fronting west on Canal Street, between Monroe and Adams Streets, opened April 4, 1881, was designed as a through station, but used as a double stub station. The traffic of its roads has entire outgrown the capacity of this station. The La Salle Street Station, fronting north on Van Buren Street, occupies the entire blpck between Sherman and La Salle Streets, and CENTRAL: 3 roads: 34 was opened July 1, 1903. There are eleven stub tracks and four ap- proach tracks. - Grand Central Station, fronting north on Harrison Street, opened December 10, 1890, having eight stub tracks and two approach tracks. Dearborn Station, fronting north on Polk Street, occupies the entire block between Federal Street and Plymouth Court, opened May 8, 1885, consists of ten stub tracks and four approach tracks. This is the most congested of all stations. Central Station, fronting on Grant Park, was opened April 17, 1893, The train shed has six tracks, with two approach tracks at the south end, a connection with the St. Charles Air Line and two switching leads at the north end. Under agreement with the South Park Commissioners, this station is to be torn down and the site vacated for park purposes. It will thus be seen that of the five older passenger stations now in use, the Union Station, Central and Dearborn Stations must soon be replaced. The La Salle Street Station will undoubtedly require enlarging or replacing within the next ten years, The Grand Central Station is badly located and of small capacity — though well arranged. The Union Station Company — under the terms of the ordinance passed March 23rd, 1914 — is about ready to begin work on a much larger passenger terminal located on Canal Street upon substantially the same site as to train shed and track that it now occupies. The Illinois Central — owning the Central Station — has under con- sideration a greatly enlarged passenger terminal located at Twelfth Street and the Lake Front, of sufficient capacity to take care of all the railroads on the south side of the City now using stations east of che Chicago River. The freight houses and team tracks of the A. T. & S. F. RJ., C. & E. I. R. R., C. & E. R. R., C. I. & L. Ry., G. T. W., and Wabash Railroad, are located between Clark Street and State Street, and ex- tend from Fifteenth Street to Taylor Street; the approach to all of these freight houses being from the^ south by way of the tracks of the C. & W. I. R. R., except in the case of the Santa Fe, which has an independent approach parallel to the western line of the Illinois Central. The freight house and team tracks of the L. S. & M. S., Nickle Plate, and C. R. I. & P. are located between Clark Street and Fifth Avenue, and extend from Twelfth Street to Polk Street, the approach being by the joint L. S. & M. S., and C. R. I. & P. tracks. The freight houses of the B. & O. Railroad, C. G. W. R. R., and P. M. R. R., are located between Fifth Avenue and the South Branch 35 of the Chicago River, and extend from Taylor Street to Harrison Street, the approach being by the tracks of the B. & O. R. R., which extends parallel to Sixteenth Street and crosses the River just south of Taylor Street; the team tracks of these railroads being on B. & O. land west of the River and south of Twelfth Street. The freight houses and team tracks of the Burlington Railroad are located west of the River, between Canal Street and Stewart Ave- nue, and extend from Twelfth Street to Harrison Street. The Bur- lington also has freight houses, together with the St. Paul and North- Western, in the vicinity of Sixteenth Street, exending from Union Street to Canal Street. The Fort Wayne and xA.lton freight facilites are located between the River and Canal Street and extend from Harrison Street to Madi- son Street. Under the Union Station ordinance the freight facilities of the Burlington, Fort Wayne and Alton will be rearranged in the territory between Canal Street and the River, so that they will not extend further north than Polk Street, The C. M. & St. P. and the Pan Handle have their freight facili- ties between Fulton Street and Kinzie Street, extending from Des- plaines Street to the north branch of the Chicago River. The C. & N. W. R. R. has freight facilities adjacent to the west bank of the north branch of the Chicago River in the vicinity of Kinzie Street and also along the north side of the main channel of the Chicago River, east of Dearborn Street. The freight houses and team tracks of the Illinois Central Rail- road are located on the lake shore north of Randolph Street and ex- tend to the Chicago River. ae RAILROAD ROUTE AND TERMINAL MAP CHICAGO AND VICINITY Office of Chicago Railway Tcbmikal Commission Pte 1915 Scale 37 f titlNblHiSTTT =IIIZZ] J UHUI ^U ST II 1 ( 3T UUU U bU uu " "JREM "1. 38 39 EXHIBIT No. II REARRANGEMENT OF PASSENGER TERMINALS EXHIBIT No. II REARRANGEMENT OF PASSENGER TERMINALS. The Chicago & Northwestern Railway is provided with a new station at Canal and Madison Streets, which will be sufficient to take care of its needs for some time to come and — if its present suburban service could be eliminated therefrom — it would have sufficient facili- ties to provide for its through passenger traffic for many years. The passage of the Union Station ordinance and its acceptance by the railroads provides terminal accommodations for the roads now using the present Union Station on Canal Street and sufficient to take care of other roads entering the City from the west, which should logically use this station. With the exception of the roads in this group which enter from the west — and which roads might logically be taken into the Union Station — all of these roads enter the same section of the city and it would be practicable for these roads to use one common entrance route. The South Park Commissioners — acting under the general laws of the State of Illinois and under the special provisions of an Act approved May 4, 1903. May 2, 1907, May 25. 1911, and June 11, 1912, respectively — in an agreement with the Illinois Central Railroad Com- pany, March 30, 1912, and a supplemental agreement dated June 26, 1912, fixed the eastern boundary line of the Illinois Central Railroad between Grant Park and Fifty-first Street, and by the same terms the Illinois Central Railroad relinquished to the South Park Board its riparian rghts along the shore of Lake Michigan between the boun- daries noted above. These agreements have been confirmed by the Courts, but they cannot become practically eflfective without the passage by the City Council of ordinances covering certain provisions in the agreements referred to, and the Secretary of War has indicated that the passage of appropriate ordinances by the City providing, among other things, for a harbor district within the limits covered by these agreements, would be considered a condition precedent to the approval by the War Department of the plans of the South Park Commissioners. Should the City, the South Park Commissioners and the Illinois Central R.ailroad come to an agreement under which the City Council 40 would pass ordinances protecting the City and making possible the carrying out of the agreements referred to, the Illinois Central Rail- road would come into possession of lands which — in addition to their present holdings — would give it an unusual site for passenger termi- nals. This site, extending sputhward from Twelfth Street over 700 feet in width for a distance of 2,000 feet, with an extension 600 feet in width nearly to Thirty-first Street — a distance of about two miles — with an approach thereto having a capacity of 20 main tracks as far as Fifty-first Street and 15 tracks beyond, would make an available location for the grouping of all or most of the through trains of the South Side roads in one passenger terminal, and the land would be sufficient to take care of these railroads for an indefinite period in the future. The site for the station at the south end of Grant Park affords splendid opportunity for architectural effect, and the broad right-of- way southward for several miles along the shore of the lake, with no street crossings at grade, makes possible an avenue of approach to the City for the passenger trains of the railways from the east, the south and the southwest remarkable in capacity, attractiveness of surroundings and advantage of location. As the Illinois Central is required by its charter to pay to the State of Illinois seven per cent of its gross revenue, which is over 20 per cent of its net earnings from operation, all rentals for terminals received by it will accrue to the advantage of the citizens of Illinois, including Chicago. As the land set aside to the Illinois Central can be used only for railroad purposes, it is to the interest of the City of Chicago not only to favor but to encourage the use of this property to the fullest extent compatible with other considerations of public policy. The low cost of this property to the Illinois Central Railroad should make it possible for this Company to provide facilities for other railroads upon terms attractive to them. It should be possible — in framing ordinances — to provide some means of arbitrating the question of reasonableness of charge made by the Illinois Central to tenant companies^in case the railroads affected are not able to reach an amicable agreement. On the occasion of his recent appearance before the City Council Committee on Harbors, Wharves and Bridges, G. H. Markham, President of the Illinois Central Railroad, stated in specific language his willingness to accede to such an arrangement with respect to harbor connections. 41 The plans for the new station at Twelfth Street should provide only for through trains. There is ample room at the Illinois Central site to provide for 30 to 40 tracks and still have place for accommo- dating suburban tracks along and outside the station. The accompanying diagram, marked Plate No. 4, shows tenta- tively the routing of all of the passenger trains of the railroads now using the Grand Central, La Salle and Dearborn Stations in this terminal at Twelfth Street and the Lake Front. It also shows the simplification of the approaches to passenger terminals that would be effected by this plan. Plate No. 5 is a diagram showing tentatively the routes that would be adopted if the roads which enter from the west and now have their terminals in the Grand Central and Dearborn Stations were taken into the Union Station at Canal and Madison Streets in- stead of a station at Twelfth Street and the Lake Front. Suburban Service. The proper method for arranging for the accommodation of the uburban service of these railroads has not been worked out, but with the co-operation of the railroads it should be possible to work out a plan that would be satisfactory to them and result in greater ,commodation to the public. Such a plan might properly contemplate an underground rail- road connecting the terminals which would permit of a direct inter- change of passenger equipment between these' terminals and a rout- ing of suburban trains in a manner that would eliminate the existing .congestion caused by the present method of operating the terminal services. The Commission, however, has not proceeded sufficiently in its consideration oi this subject to be able to put forward a definite plan for suburban through routing. 42 } \ \. r 1 ^^^' — >(» 1 X. I ^3 RAILROAD route: AND TERMINAL MAP CHICAGO AND VICINITY Orr'CL or Chicaco Railway Tcbminal Comuusion Pcb 1915 SCAUt Tentati\t Arrangement WITH Three Terminal Passenger Stations 5tation3 retained mi^m to be remooe^l i --ii To accompany report of Chicago Railway Terminal Commission 43 RAILROAD ROUTE AND TERMINAL MAP CHICAGO AND VICINITY Orrtci or Chicago Railway TtRMirt^L Commimion Peb 1915. _ Scale Tentative Arrangement Three Terminal Passenger Stations ALTERNATIVE PLAN Stations retained ^m^ to be remoued i i To accompany report of Chicago Railway Terminal CommiMicn Chicago "'* -^ 44 ALTERNATIVE PLAN FOR TWO STATIONS ON THE SOUTH SIDE. It may develop — after further consideration of the question of rearrangement of passenger terminals for railroads using the stations east of the south branch of the Chicago River — that it will, in the in- terests of the public and the railroads, be found desirable to group these railroads into two stations rather than one station. In this event it would be possible — with the Chicago River straightened — to develop a passenger terminal on the site now occu- pied by the Grand Central Station, sufficient to take care of the passenger traffic of a number of railroads. This development would not interfere with the southward growth of the City and a plan could be worked out that would permit of satisfactory crossing for all of the east and west streets intersected. If this location were adopted, however, it would be desirable to use the existing rights of way of the Rock Island-Lake Shore or Western Indiana as a route of entrance. Such an entrance route would permit of a more economic and satisfactory layout and would very materially reduce the passenger train mileage of the railroads which now use the B. & O. C. T. tracks as an entrance to this station. A practical arrangement of routes contemplating these two sta- tions on the South Side is shown in Plate No. 6. 45 RAILROAD ROUTE AND TERMINAL MAP CHICAGO AND VICINITY Omct or Chicago Railway Terminal Commimion VtB 1915 Scale Tentative Arr.\ngement Four Terminal Passenger Stations Stations retained ihi^h to be remoued i . — i To accompany report of Chicago Railway Terminal Commission Chicago 46 EXHIBIT No. Ill TENTATIVE PLANS FOR THE REARRANGEMENT OF FREIGHT TERMINALS EXHIBIT No. Ill TENTATIVE PLANS FOR THE REARRANGEMENT OF FREIGHT TERMINALS In the study of the possibilities of rearrangement of freight terminal facilities in the congested district, consideration has first been given to the territory between the south branch of the Chicago River and State Street and north of Eighteenth Street, because the terminals in this district ofifer the greatest obstruction to the natural expansion of the central business district. In this territory are located the principal inbound and outbound freight houses of twelve railroads.* The territory occupied by these terminals is all on the same level and all the railroads enter the terri- tory at practically' the same point, so that there is little physical obstruction in the way of combining the facilities of these railroads in one great terminal. A situation is here presented that would lend itself admirably to the application of the principal of co-operative operation. It should be possible — with proper co-operation among the rail- roads interested — to work out a plan of development in this territory that would, while conserving the interests of the railroads, make possible the opening up of thoroughfares and result in a more eco- nomic use of property. In the tentative plans which are submitted herewith, alternative propositions have been, developed showing various possibilities of readjusting the freight terminals in this district on the basis of the two level plan for freight handling with warehouse operation. In all these plans the effort has been made to secure the elimina- tion of present railroad grade crossings and the opening up of streets for uninterrupted traffic without interference with railroad develop- ment. These plans are not intended to represent the mature judgment of the Chicago Railway Terminal Commission. They are presented *See Table 17 in statistical appendix for list of these Railroads and the average daily freight business of each. 47 simply as a representation of what might be accomplished through co-operative operation and intensive development. They are pre- sented at this time solely as a basis for discussion and future con- sideration of the subject. Of the accompanying plans, Schemes 1, 2, 3 and 4, shown in Plates 7, 8, 9 and 10, are based on the assumption that the south branch of the Chicago River will be straightened substantially alongf the lines agreed upon in the Union Station ordinance. In Scheme 5, Plate 11, is shown a possible rearrangement of the terminals for more intensive use, with the south branch of the Chi- cago River unchanged. All of the plans are readily adaptable to the universal freight house system. Scheme No. 1 — Shown on Plate No. 7. In Scheme No. 1 the Chicago River is shown straightened ; the present crossing of the L. S. & M. S. and C, R. I. & P. tracks with the C. & W. I. at Sixteenth and Clark Streets is maintained, and the St. Charles Air Line is shown in practically the present location. The present bridge of the B. & O. Railroad, north of Twelfth Street, is removed, and the B. & C. Railroad is shown crossing the river on the same bridge with the St. Charles Air Line. North and south, Dearborn, Clark, Sherman, Fifth Avenue and Franklin Streets are opened up continuously; east and west, Polk, Taylor, Twelfth, Fourteenth and Sixteenth Streets are shown opened continuously through the terminal and across the river. Between Dearborn Street and the River and north of Sixteenth Street, these streets would be on viaduct at the same level as the river bridges, thus permitting occupation of the space underneath with railroad tracks. East of Dearborn and south of Sixteenth Street the street grades would descend to connect with existing street levels. In this scheme railroad occupation is restricted to the territory west of Dearborn Street and extends northward to Polk Street, with the exception of the B. & O. facilities, which extend to Harrison Street. Freight houses are all located north of Twelfth Street, the territory south of Twelfth Street being occupied with team track layout. In case the L. C. L. Clearing and Universal Freight Houses are adopted, all outbound freight would be loaded into cars at these team tracks. The capacities of this layout are: Car standing capacity ; house tracks, 2,800 cars. Car standing capacity; team tracks, 1,290 cars. 48 49 Scheme No. 2 — Shown on Plate No. 8. There is considerable doubt as to the necessity of maintaining the St. Charles Air Line as an avenue of interchange between the railroads west of the Chicago River and the railroads east of the Chicago River and on the Lake Front. The St. Charles Air Line, in addition to furnishing trackage for the interchange of this transfer business, also furnishes a route of entrance for the Chicago, Madison & Northern Railroad into the Illinois Central Terminal. In the development of the Illinois Central Terminal south of Twelfth Street, it will be found advantageous to provide for a con- nection with the Chicago, Madison & Northern further south than the existing St. Charles Air Line and various routes of entrance have been considered for this line in this connection. In Scheme No. 2, shown herewith, the St. Charles Air Line is eliminated, and the Chicago, Madison & Northern is shown extend- ing parallel to and north of Archer Avenue. In this scheme, the Chi- cago River is shown straightened ; the B. & O. existing bridge north of Twelfth Street is removed ; and the crossing of the B. & O. shown in line with their present holdings south of Fourteenth Street. The existing crossing of the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern and Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific with the Western Indiana tracks is also eliminated, and the occupation by railroad terminals is re- stricted to the territory west of Clark Street. In this arrangement the existing freight house locations west of Clark Street and north of Twelfth Street are maintained, and the possibililties of future locations in this territory are shown. South of Twelfth Street the territory is occupied by team tracks, the controlling principle in this layout being that the houses would only be used for inbound freight and that all outbound freight would be loaded directly into cars from team tracks and rehandled at an outer L. C. L. clearing house. In this layout existing freight house locations are shown in solid black rectangles ; possible additional houses in open rectangles. The capacity of this layout is : House tracks; 1,524 cars, standing capacity. Team tracks ; 2,650 cars, standing capacity. 50 51 Scheme No. 3 — Shown on Plate No. 9. In this scheme the St. Charles Air Line is removed and the approach to the Illinois Central Railroad from the west is shown south of Eighteenth Street. This permits a complete separation of railroad grade crossings in the territory and makes possible the opening up of Fourteenth Street, Sixteenth Street and Eighteenth Street on satisfactory grades. Sherman Street, Fifth Avenue and Franklin Street are shown opened up continuously through the district. Freight houses are located in the territory between Clark Street and the River, and the territory between Clark Street and State Street is shown free of railroad occupation. As will be seen from the plate, house tracks are shown in sets of four on the lower level, with longitudinal platforms between each set serving two sets of tracks on each side. On the street or upper level the houses are shown provided with cross platforms for receiv- ing freight connected by elevators with the longitudinal platforms below. Under this arrangernent, teams would not occupy street space while receiving or delivering freight, thereby greatly relieving con- gestion on the thoroughfare streets. It also provides a much greater capacity for standing teams than in the arrangement where receiving platforms are parallel with the tracks and enables a maximum num- ber of cars to be reached with a minimum amount of trucking. By making the track groups in short lengths economical switch- ing facilities are provided. This layout gives a car standing capacity of 3,580 cars on house tracks and 800 cars on team tracks. 52 53 Scheme No. 4 — Shown on Plate No. 10. In Scheme No. 4 the track arrangement is practically the same as Scheme No. 3, the St. Charles Air Line being shown removed and the Illinois Central Railroad tracks shown south of Eighteenth Street. The street arrangement is the same as Scheme No. 3, and a similar house layout is used. In this scheme, however, the railroad occupancy is shown ex- tending east to Dearborn Street. This is done in order to provide for a market place development along the River from Taylor Street to Sixteenth Street. As shown on the plate, the stores for the market development would be in the narrow block between Franklin Street and Fifth Avenue extended. This would give two broad streets on each side of the stores, which would greatly assist in relieving congestion and would permit of railroad tracks serving the stores on the lower level and also direct access to the stores from the river. Team track facilities are provided in the blocks between Fifth Avenue and Sherman Street. Should it be found desirable, cold storage warehouses could be provided adjacent to the River, either in the block between Twelfth and Taylor Streets or between Taylor and Polk Streets. This layout gives a car standing capacity of 3,330 cars on house tracks and 1,070 cars on team tracks. 54 55 Scheme No. 5 — Shown on Plate No. 11. Scheme No. 5 shows an arrangement for a more intensive de- velopment of freight terminals, with the south branch of the Chicago River remaining unchanged, and on the assumption that the existing passenger terminals between State. Street and the Chicago River would be removd. In this scheme it is contemplated that the present bridge of the Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad across the Chicago River would remain unchanged, and that a freight development for the tenant roads of this Company would be made between Fifth Ave- nue and the River and extending to Harrison Street, occupying the territory now used for other freight and terminal facilities. The St. Charles Air Line and the Lake Shore, Rock Island and Western Indiana tracks are shown as at present. A two-level freight house development is shown extending from Twelfth Street to Polk Street and from State Street to the River, and the territory between State Street and the River south of Twelfth Street is shown occupied by team tracks. The same arrangement of freight houses is used as is shown in Scheme No. 1, Plate No. 7. In this arrangement, all streets between State Street and Fifth Avenue are shown opened up to Twelfth Street. South of Twelfth Street, Dearborn Street and Clark Street are shown opened through the terminal. Polk and Taylor Streets are shown on an upper level with ramps connecting with State Street. This layout gives a car standing capacity of 1,030 cars on house tracks and 900 cars on team tracks. 56 TtNTATTVE Plan ron REARRANGEMENT OF FREIGHT TERMINALS SCHEME N°5. To accompany report of Chicago Railway Terminal C-ommiaaion SCM-t Of Map 67 «V>>^"' >s^^ 5-^ EXHIBIT No, IV STRAIGHTENING CHICAGO RIVER EXHIBIT No. IV STRAIGHTENING CHICAGO RIVER On Plate No. 12 is shown the proposed straightening of the south branch of the Chicago River along the line given in the Union Station ordinance and the Pennsylvania R. R. freight ordinance March 23, 1914, and the B. & O. C. T. ordinance passed February 19, 1915, and the C. & W. I. ordinance now pending before the City Council. The property owned by different railroads in the district affected by this proposed change is shown on this plate and in the following table is given the approximate areas between Clark Street and the center line of Dodge Street, which is the west line of the proposed change. The areas given are based on a compilation of available existing data and are as reasonably accurate as could be obtained without making a special survey. 58 Q t« « «i CA! '"J CM ' i_ Ih u. O rt rt m;S5s O o • o O I— I W H O I— ( < H CO W > I— ( o H W P P LO < W < k. <-3 ^ , ^ ^ On U ro a,0 S o S ^ r>» ro 5>. t t^ (— ) ij-> O ■—! ^H ro Co 5 s to O O O O : JOOO QOOp oCoo'"m5o'c> CO CO CO coco coco (U .5 rt ct3 u o3 u -a 5^^ -a c 59 CO » — I CO Cvf o H O H > o bo 4» • ^^ S? « S irj rt . j~- O Q fo SN uo CN 0\ On CM o ■^ \o\o t^ C\ ^ - 1—1 •— I CNl i— ' CM ■— CM CM 0\ cc CO Tl- 00 CM LO '— I to T-l "-• »-H I— I »— I »-< I— 1 1— I to en in < Pl, o o < u ) — I u ■^ CO 1 lo « Co^ H C/5 < >» Silt-o :£2a:£j;^ 1 '- 2 h-H P gc,- 1 00 ^ u O fii (U Ci^ . H 1^ ^^3 ^.x: ^ -- T-H Cm .— 1 i-i 1 CM 1 00 l-c o < Q ^ ^ P4 t^' rj 1^ pq o3 c^' -■ u u U < O OOOOO Ice COfOOCMO'^iO I Tl- CM CO I LO •-' I CM OOOOn I O^ OOcoO^O-^iO I CO CM CO 1 LO >— I 1 (M r^cocoio I-/. occOr-iooOiot^oo lo i-H .-1 I C^. .—1 I lO r^cocoio \ -n occo>-'000"Oi>xOs ic^J CO t/i H-; >h" p^' 1-5 U ^: U H O H Pi fc .OW P^^, ^ 'A oaoa < u U cJ U cj d ^ < H O -2; o w H CO W H P^ O o w 1-1 < CO < -1 P^ o pq < W Q 97 00 0\ 5 O . ^rj-^vo loo "^lot^tx vocM-^vo loo "^irjr^vO ^ ^ m ■^ ^ T3 Pi w w < m m < Pi O o < u I — I u CM OOOO I o M oooo I o ;^ tr^oort-vo 1 ^ ■*ir3rxt>. 1 "^ g-^* 1 T-H «— ( >— ( 1 Tj- o ^ .• li; i: ^oo-*^ 1 "^ ■*vOl^ VO 1 ^' E-.^ 1 '"^ .— 1 >— 1 1 Tt- o Pi pi CQ pq U CM H •z W u Q H O H >. « a! 12; W C^ J U 1^' ^ H-; ^ Oh o Q < (A 00 00 0\ c to •-J C 98 ro ^ ^ O h-, '4. O o r^ \0 <^ vo O lO tJ- \o oo'cvTo'vo'cm" O Q 00 00 1>. ^t-H ^ f^ vO t>. O 00 <^ o W CO CO < Oh <^ I — I Q. ^^ We Hi ^^ CO < PL. o o < u I — I u o 'A ^ 11^ 00 «o O f^io O CO On ^CNl (tT crTc^f CO -^ oj OOiM coo CO CO O >— " vo O CO t^Ot^CNl O Q 00 lO CO -^ CO ■^ \0 O"^ CO "O Q OLO OnO ) LO o O lO ro CO .-H — ( lo ^ CO \0 CO"T-'^t^JcOOOCOlO >0 O'^OnvO'— iCM^VO Cs)_ ^- Tt O 00 On_co ^ -^ iW ■— T Tf Tj^ CO r-T CO Csl CO O O •* fM OOOO'OQO^CO t^ ^ O vo ■<*■ OOOOcoOioio u-j .— I Tt- CO t>. 0\ CO VO 00 oOt^O OOVO ^88So8°; I coio cOM?':9r^OOOCOO 00 ,— ( -^ CO 00 CO CO CO 00 On ^ CO ■* OOI^-* oo ^ r^ 0\ CO 00 in-^'^O \6 cm' CM O ^ OQOO CO OO OO oo" 00 o OO 8°88 ^ OOr^ ■* ■rf ^ 0\ CO oo" cm' '-^ lO QTf O iD >o ■^ OOCO CO r-TlO W" CM CO OOOO O OOOO 00 OOOO S8888 1—1 irj o ^ ■*_^oooo cm' ■^ O CM of e^ ^"i^ CO ^ « Ci^ « >,' e^ ^ X >, a p:i hJ pi;' ;PiP^ CO CO CO =a p^ d:^:^HH- 2 Pi W ^ CO - X ^ Pi ^ O 2 2 o w CO < h-1 O PQ P^ < w Q < H W u Q iz; < O < H W U Q ;z; < 99 CO CO '^ 0\ ^ •^ On ^' CM ID CO c 03 U 3 CO u ^ Co O Table No. 4. CHICAGO PASSENGER TERMINALS— MAIL Average Number of Sacks Daily STATION NORTHWESTERN. UNION RAILROAD .C. & N. W. Ry.. Through Trains . 9,178 .P. F. W. & C. Ry... P. C. C. & St. L. Ry. C. M. & St. P. Ry... C. B. & Q. R. R C. & A. R. R , 8,060 , 1,580 .15,084 , 19,425 , 844 LA SALLE.. TOTAL 44,993 L. S. & M. S. Ry 22,650 C. I. & S. R. R 40 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R 220 C. R. I. & P. Ry 2,135 TOTAL 25,045 DEARBORN. .A. T. & S. F. Ry. C. & O. R. R... C. & E. I. R. R. C. L & L. Ry.... C. & W. I. R. R. C. & E. R. R.... G. T. W. Ry. . . Wabash R. R. . 2,618 47 8,251 790 750 1,592 473 TOTAL 14,521 ' GRAND CENTRAL. .B. & O. R. R B. & O. C. T. R. R. C. G. W. R. R P. M. R. R 785 325 796 CENTRAL.... TOTAL 1,906 .C. C. C. & St. L. Ry 1,365 M. C. R. R 1,497 M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry... 1,016 L C. R. R 3,299 TOTAL 7,177 RANDOLPH I. C. R. R. Suburban. TOTAL ALL STATIONS Suburban Trains 1,009 25 252 25 302 450 79 529 18 11 29 465 TOTAL 10,187 8,085 1,580 15,336 19,450 844 45,295 23,100 40 220 2,214 25,574 2,618 47 8,269 790 750 1,592 484 14,550 785 325 796 1,906 1,365 1,497 1,016 3,299 7,177 465 102,820 2,334 105,154 100 Table No. 5 CHICAGO PASSENGER TERMINALS— BAGGAGE Average Numljer of Pieces Daily Through Suburban STATION RAILROAD Trains Trains TOTAL NORTHWESTERN C. & N. W. Ry 4,928 976 5,904 UNION P. F. W. & C. Ry 827 12 839 . P. C. C. & St. L. Ry 760 760 C. M. & St. P. Ry 2,141 119 2,260 C. B. & Q. R. R 2,480 185 2,665 C. & A. R. R 809 809 TOTAL 7,017 316 7,333 LA SALLE L. S. & M. S. Ry 1,306 25 1,331 C. I. & S. R. R 56 56 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R 375 375 C. R. L & P. Ry 993 40 1,033 TOTAL 2,730 65 2,795 DEARBORN A. T. & S. F. Ry 550 550 C. & O. R. R 7?, 72 C. & E. I. R. R 688 688 C. L & L. Ry 253 253 C. & W. I. R. R 8 8 C. & E. R. R 138 138 G T. W. Ry 902 . 902 Wabash R. R 511 511 TOTAL 3,115 GRAND CENTRAL B. & O. R. R '. 293 B. & O. C. T. R. R C. G. W. R. R 149 P. M. R. R 818 TOTAL 1.260 CENTRAL C. C C. & St. L. Ry 296 M. C. R. R 1,157 M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry... 274 I. C. R. R 884 TOTAL 2,611 RANDOLPH I. C. Suburban TOTAL ALL STATIONS -21,661 1,398 23,059 8 3,123 293 12 12 149 818 12 1,272 296 1,157 274 884 2,611 21 21 101 Table No. 6 CHICAGO PASSENGER TERMINALS— EXPRESS Average Number of Tons per Day Through Suburban STATION RAILROAD Trains Trains TOTAL NORTHWESTERN C. & N. W. Ry 311 46 357 UNION. .P. F. W. & C. Ry... P. C. C. & St. L. Ry. C. M. & St. P. Ry.. C. B. &Q. R. R C. & A. R. R TOTAL 134 70 391 167 25 9 21 18 143 70 412 185 25 787 48 835 LA SALLE. .L. S. & M. S. Ry C. I. & S. R. R N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R. C. R. I. & P. Ry 191 11 11 141 TOTAL 354 4 12 16 195 11 11 153 370 DEARBORN. .A. T. & S. F. Ry. C. & O. R. R C. & E. I. R. R... C. I. & L. Ry.... C. & W. L R. R.. C. & E. R. R G. T. W. Ry Wabash R. R. . . TOTAL 29 16 80 42 112 34 51 1 10 1 29 16 81 42 10 112 34 52 364 12 376 GRAND CENTRAL. ,B. & O. R. R B. & O. C. T. R. R.. C. G. W. R. R P. M. R. R 51 15 67 TOTAL 133 2 51 2 IS 67 135 CENTRAL.. .C. C. C. & St. L. Ry M. C. R. R M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry. [. C. R. R TOTAL RANDOLPH I. C. Suburban 14 221 14 121 370 TOTAL FOR ALL STATIONS 2.319 9 133 14 221 14 121 370 2,452 102 1 "^ ■g \0 C^ '-' ■* \0 -"-i ■^ rt Tj- lO »o lO >^ ,^ — (^ ^H ^- ^H r— H ^r^ lo o ^ "^ O ."S lo ro r^ r^ f^ r^ a fo 00 ro I— 1 1— 1 po CO CM 0\ Ci O r^ ro •* On OO On 1 »<= "^ "3 -. r^ lo -^ o >0 r^ •*i ^00O\t^>JTpi^ ^j '^i — ^Ov^ioioOn'— ' ^ 0\ "^ CO )Q o H < w H Pi W o w en en < Ph O O < u I — I X u ■ VO 00 '-' MD M3 CO ' ID ,— I cj n i-o >— < >CM ro .-H ^^ ^ cC Q ;a-Tj- CO lO CO CM -^ ■S O CO 0\ CM tv. r-i ui t^' C\f co" •— I O^f rT-. ^ ^ S "3 CO '-I O O CO CO O (N CO CO '-' CM 00 ^COCMCM^ ^O t^ \0 •* '— I On ^^QioOO^OCM c -^ -^ c^i 00 ID •>._ Cli oT Lo" — ' ^- O Q -rl- vO CO CM ■^ >— I CovS> ^^STN^OO'i-cOCO ^^ e< t~, CM CM T-H r-H :2; w -Co O CO On ^O ID •~.— ooo^^ cooo 13 CO CM .-H ^ < t^p:i^^<<^ 02; u o 7^ CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS INBOUND OUTBOUND RAILROAD Cars Tons Cars Tons A. T. & S. E. Ry 15 101 148 1,053 B. & O. R. R 54 430 56 482 B. & O. C. T. R. R 40 250 48 406 C. & A. R. R 24 150 67 330 C. & E. I. R. R 40 191 110 712 C. B. & Q. R. R 71 681 176 1,009 C. G. W. R. R 18 150 50 300 C. L & L. Ry 45 206 45 217 C. M. & St. P. Ry 120 553 191 832 C. & N. W. Ry 236 1,245 255 1,554 C. R. I. & P. Ry 51 333 115 668 C. W. P. & S. Ry........ 2 25 1 10 C. & E. R. R 100 800 55 325 G. T. W. Ry 74 637 48 305 I. C R. R 145 1,020 321 2,092 I. N. Ry 31 223 L. S. & M. S. Ry 143 1,115 138 872 M. C. R. R 95 670 110 812 M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry. . 28 158 54 285 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R. . . 50 300 19 103 P. M. R. R 20 110 23 115 P. C. C. & St. L. Ry 72 600 70 576 P. F. W. & C. Ry 83 584 86 697 Wabash R. R 65 500 83 550 TOTALS 1,591 10,809 2,300 14,528 NOTE: Figures based on business of March, 1913. Table No. 8 TOTAL Cars Tons 163 1,154 110 912 88 656 91 480 150 903 247 1,690 68 450 90 423 311 1,385 491 2,799 166 1,001 3 35 155 . 1,125 122 942 466 3,112 31 223 281 1,987 205 1,482 82 443 69 403 43 225 142 1,176 169 1,281 148 1,050 3,891 25,337 CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS Table No. 9 DAILY HOUSE FREIGHT BUSINESS In Territory East of Desplaines Street, from 18th Street to Chicago Avenue Car Cap'y INBOUND OUTBOUND TOTAL of House RAILROAD Cars Tons Cars Tons Cars Tons Tracks A. T. & S. F. Ry 15 101 65 450 80 551 118 B. & O. R. R 54 430 56 482 110 912 116 C. & A. R. R 24 150 67 330 91 480 141 C. & E. I. R. R 40 191 110 712 150 903 163 C. B. & Q. R. R 71 681 171 973 242 1,654 273 C. G. W. R. R 18 150 50 300 68 450 46 C. L & L. Ry 45 206 45 217 90 423 39 C. M. & St. P. Ry 120 553 201 832 311 1,385 237 C. & N. W. Ry 128 691 253 1,545 381 2,236 364 C. R. I. & P. Ry 45 300 100 550 145 850 200 C. & E. R. R 100 800 55 325 155 1,125 80 G. T. W. Ry 74 637 48 305 122 942 80 L C. R. R 90 515 230 1,400 320 1,915 272 L. S. & M. S. Ry 123 1,020 130 780 253 1,800 147 M. C. R. R 95 670 110 812 205 1,482 143 M. St. P.&S. S. M. Ry.. 28 158 54 285 82 443 60 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R... 50 300 19 103 69 403 54 P. M. R. R 20 110 23 115 43 225 29 P. C. C. & St. L. Ry.... 69 589 35 347 104 936 87 P. F. W. & C. Ry 63 520 73 662 136 1,182 210 Wabash R. R 65 500 83 550 148 1,050 171 TOTALS 1,337 9,272 1,978 12,075 3,305 21,347 3,030 NOTE: Figures based on business of March, 1913. 104 Table No. 10 CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS DAILY HOUSE FREIGHT BUSINESS In Territory East of Desplaines Street from 18th Street to Chicago Avenue INBOUND DISTRICT Cars Tons North of Chicago River, East of North Branch. B. & O. R. R 3 30 C. M. & St. P. Ry 10 67 C. & N. W. Ry 46 222 TOTALS 59 319 Desplaines St. to River Madison to Chicago Avenue. C. M. & St. P. Ry 110 486 C. & N. W. Ry 82 469 P. C.'C. & St. L. Ry 69 589 TOTALS 261 1,544 Desplaines Street to River, Madison to 12th Street. C. & A. R. R 24 150 C. B. & Q. R. R 64 454 P. F. W. & C. Ry 63 520 TOTALS 151 1,124 OUTBOUND Cars Tons 4 7 83 174 100 35 32 66 505 94 603 706 590 347 309 1.643 275 1,618 Car Cap'y TOTAL of House Cars Tons Tracks 7 17 129 62 133 727 153 922 284 182 104 1,192 1,059 936 570 3,187 426 2,742 8 48 86 142 182 122 87 391 67 330 91 480 141 162 856 226 1,310 207 46 432 109 952 157 505 12th Street to 18th Street C. B. & Q. R. R C. M. & St. P. Ry C. & N. W. Ry P. F. W. & C. Ry M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry TOTALS 35 Harrison to 18th Street. A. T. & S. F. Ry 15 B. & O. R. R 51 C. & E. I. R. R 40 C. G. W. R. R 18 C. L & L. Ry 45 C. R. I. & P. Ry 45 C. & E. R. R 100 G. T. W. Ry 74 L. S. & M. S. Ry 123 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R.. 50 P. M. R. R 20 Wabash R. R 65 TOTALS 646 Lake Front. I. C. R. R 90 M. C. R. R 95 TOTALS 185 ,. 7 .. 227 158 9 10 70 27 54 117 60 450 230 285 16 10 70 27 82 344 60 450 230 443 66 7 156 .. .. 28 53 179 385 1,185 170 1,122 205 1,527 340 2,212 525 3,397 461 101 65 450 80 551 118 400 52 450 103 850 108 191 110 712 150 903 163 150 50 300 68 450 46 206 45 217 90 423 39 300 100 550 145 850 200 800 55 325 155 1,125 80 637 48 305 122 942 80 1.020 130 780 253 1,800 147 300 19 103 69 403 54 110 23 115 43 225 29 500 83 550 148 1,050 171 4,715 780 4,857 1,426 9,572 1,235 515 230 1,400 320 1,915 272 670 110 812 205 1,482 143 415 105 TOTALS— BY DISTRICTS North of Chicago River, East of North Branch.. 59 319 94 603 153 922 142 Desplaines Street to River, Madison to Chicago Ave. 261 1,544 309 1,643 570 3,187 391 Desplaines Street to River, Madison to 12th Street. 151 1,124 275 1,618 426 2,742 505 Desplaines Street to River, 12th Street to 18th St.. 35 385 170 1,122 205 1,527 461 East of Chicago River, Harrison to 18th Street. 646 4,715 780 4,857 1,426 9,572 1,235 Lake Front 185 1,185 9,272 340 2,212 12,075 525 3,397 415 GRAND TOTALS...] 1,337 1,968 3,305 21,347 3,149 NOTE: Figures based on business of March, 1913. Table No. 11 CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS TOTAL TEAM TRACK FREIGHT DAILY INBOUND OUTBOUND RAILROAD Cars Tons Cars Tons A. T. & S. F. Ry 12 152 5 57 B. & O. R. R 52 1,065 8 130 B. & O. C. T. R. R 70 2,296 8 153 Belt Railway 68 1,460 10 171 C. & A. R. R 9 14 9 19 C. & E. I. R. R 23 491 8 118 C. & W. L R. R 42 1,138 13 239 C. B. & Q. R. R 42 720 17 225 C. G. W. R. R 6 120 5 150 C. I. & L. Ry 15 300 3 60 C. J. Ry 32 675 14 225 C. M. & St. P. Ry 203 4.015 55 1,015 C. & N. W. Ry 280 8,263 51 996 C. R. I. & P. Ry 81 2,945 20 421 C. & E. R. R 10 140 5 65 G. T. W. Ry 16 272 16 190 L C. R. R 84 1,618 27 685 L N. Ry 5 150 1 L. S. & M. S. Ry 64 1,353 33 1,095 M. C. R. R 31 500 16 230 M. St. P. &. S. S. M. Ry 12 200 1 14 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R 5 65 11 90 P. M. R. R 12 200 2 27 P. C. C. & St. L. Ry 69 1,715 15 270 P. F. W. & C. Ry 69 1,769 16 328 Wabash R. R 25 830 10 120 TOTALS 1,337 32,466 388 7,094 NOTE: Figures are based on business of March, 1913. 106 Cars Tons 17 209 60 1,195 78 2,449 78 1,631 18 33 31 609 55 1,377 59 945 11 270 18 360 46 900 258 5,030 331 9,259 101 3,366 15 205 32 462 121 2,303 5 151 97 2,448 47 730 13 214 16 155 14 227 84 1,985 85 2,097 35 950 1,725 47,660 Table No. 12 CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS TEAM TRACK FREIGHT DAILY In Territory East of Desplaines Street from 18th Street to Chicago Avenue Car Cap'v INBOUND OUTBOUND TOTAL of Team RAILROAD Cars Tons Cars Tons Cars Tons Tracks A. T. & S. F. Rv 12 152 5 57 17 209 141 B. &. O. R. R 20 200 3 75 23 275 162 B. & O. C. T. R. R 6 146 2 42 8 188 133 C. & A. R. R 9 14 9 19 18 33 116 C. & E. I. R. R 14 225 6 81 20 306 146 C. B. & Q. R. R 41 708 16 204 57 912 386 C. G. W. R. R 6 120 5 150 11 270 138 C. I. & L. Ry....- 15 300 3 60 18 360 68 C. M. & St. P. Ry 84 1,615 30 620 114 2,235 292 C. & N. W. Ry 122 3,518 37 721 159 4.239 691 C. R. I. & P. Ry 23 605 12 258 35 863 171 C. & E. R. R 10 140 5 65 15 205 69 G. T. W. Ry 11 198 14 169 25 367 73 1. C. R. R 40 800 22 480 62 1,280 470 L. S. & M. S. Ry 35 700 25 900 60 1,600 206 M. C. R. R 31 500 16 230 47 730 157 M. St. P.&S. S. M. Ry. 12 200 1 14 13 214 99 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R. 5 65 11 90 16 155 94 P. M. R. R 12 200 2 27 14 227 126 P.C.C.&St. L. Ry 33 695 6 97 39 792 172 P. F. W. & C. Ry 39 956 12 195 51 1,151 230 Wabash R. R 25 825 10 120 35 945 100 TOTALS 605 12,882 252 4,674 857 17,556 4,240 NOTE: Figures are based on business of March, 1913. Table No. 13 CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS DAILY TEAM TRACK BUSINESS In Territory East of Desplaines Street from 18th Street to Chicago INBOUND DISTRICT Cars Tons North of Chicago River, East of North Branch C. M. & St. P. Rv 35 680 C. & N. W. Ry 7 95 TOTALS 42 775 Desplaines St. to River, Madison to Chicago Ave. C. M. & St. P. Ry 45 850 C. & N. W. Ry 87 2,683 P.C.C.&St. L. Ry 33 695 P. F. W. & C. Ry 9 124 TOTALS 174 4,352 OUTBOUND Cars Tons 20 12 32 400 135 32 53: 703 TOTAL Cars Tons 55 19 1,080 230 Avenue Car Cap'y of Team Tracks 102 41 74 1,310 206 5,055 143 8 160 53 1,010 160 18 446 105 3,129 473 6 97 39 792 172 9 124 31 836 107 Desplaines St. to River, Madison to 12th Street C. & A. R. R 9 14 9 19 C. B. & Q. R. R 13 203 14 179 P. F. W. & C. Ry 15 330 6 68 TOTALS 37 547 29 266 Desplaines St. to River, 12th to 18th Street B. & O. R. R 20 200 3 75 B. & O. C. T. R. R.... 6 146 2 42 C. B. & Q. R. R 28 505 2 25 C. G. W. R. R 6 120 5 150 C. M. & St. P. Ry 4 85 2 60 C. & N. W. Ry 28 740 7 140 P. M. R. R 12 200 2 21 P. F. W. & C. Rv IS 502 6 127 M. St. P. &S. S. M. Ry. 12 200 1 14 TOTALS 131 2,698 30 660 East of Chicago River, Harrison to 18th St. A. T. & S. F. Ry 12 152 5 57 C. & E. I. R. R 14 225 6 81 C. L & L. Ry 15 300 3 60 C. R. I. & P. Ry 2Z 605 12 258 C. & E. R. R 10 140 5 65 G. T. W. Ry 11 198 14 169 L. S. & M. S. Rv 35 700 25 900 N.Y. C.&St. L. R. R... 5 65 11 90 Wabash R. R 25 825 10 120 TOTALS 150 3,210 91 1,800 Lake Front L C. R. R 40 800 22 480 M. C. R. R 31 500 16 230 TOTALS 71 1.300 38 710 TOTALS— BY DISTRICTS Xorth of Chicago River, East of North Branch 42 775 32 535 Desplaines St. to River, Madison to Chicago Ave. 174 4,352 32 703 Desplaines St. to River, Madison to 12th St... Zl 547 29 266 Desplaines St. to River, 12th to 18th Street... 131 2.698 30 660 East of Chicago River, Harrison to 18th St.. 150 3,210 91 1.800 Lake Front 71 1,300 38 710 GRAND TOTALS. 605 12.882 252 4,674 NOTE: Figures based on business of March, 1913 18 33 116 27 382 131 21 398 11 66 813 109 2,010 324 23 275 162 8 188 133 30 530 255 11 270 138 6 145 30 35 880 177 14 227 126 21 629 122 13 214 230 161 3,358 1,373 17 209 141 20 306 146 18 360 68 35 863 171 15 205 69 25 367 73 60 1.600 206 16 155 94 35 945 100 241 5,010 1,068 62 1,280 470 47 730 157 627 74 1.310 143 206 5,055 836 66 813 324 161 3.358 1,373 241 5,010 1,068 109 2,010 627 857 17,556 4,371 108 CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS Table No. 14 Outbound House Freight Transfer Freight Received Daily BY CAR BY TEAM BY TUNNEL TOTAL RAILROAD Tons Tom Tons Tons A. T. & S. F. Ry 673 673 B. & O. R. R 150 50 20 220 C. & A. R. R 93 60 12 165 C. & E. I. R. R 250 80 20 350 C. B. &Q. R. R 130 210 21 361 C. G. W. R. R 12 200 9 221 C. I. & L. Ry 36 4 5 45 C. M. & St. P. Ry 665 145 70 880 C. & N. W. Ry 1,296 92 15 1,403 C. R. I. & P. Ry 50 75 40 165 C. & E. R. R 32 100 26 158 G. T. W. Ry 133 69 21 223 I. C. R. R 400 150 100 650 I. N. Ry 90 90 L. S. & M. S. Ry 290 48 130 468 M. C. R. R 300 66 20 386 M. St. P. &. S. S. M. Ry... 60-20 15 95 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R 15 5 20 P. M. R. R 18 6 24 P. C. C. & St. L. Ry 85 77 14 176 P. F. W. & C. Ry 312 79 39 430 Wabash R. R 150 10 160 TOTALS 5,225 1,546 592 7,363 NOTE: Figures based on business of March, 1913. CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS Table No. 15 Inbound House Freight Transfer Freight Forwarded Daily BY CAR BY TEAM BY TUNNEL TOTAL RAILROAD Tons Tons Tons Tons A. T. & S. F. Ry 40 5 45 B. & O. R. R 40 30 25 95 B. & O. C. T. R. R 250 250 C. & A. R. R 4 33 12 49 C. & E. I. R. R 32 59 13 104 C. B. & Q. R. R 96 104 67 267 C. G. W. R. R 10 60 40 110 C. I. & L. Ry 65 22 87 C. M. & St. P. Ry 245 54 299 C. & N. W. Ry 477 113 78 668 C. R. I. & P. Ry 30 130 35 195 C. W. P. & S. R. R 10 10 C. & E. R. R 15 10 8 33 G. T. W. Ry 108 31 139 I. C. R. R 108 170 75 353 L. S. & M. S. Ry * 60 * 60 M. C. R. R 545 64 609 M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry... 39 16 55 N. Y. C. & St. L. R. R.... 55 10 65 P. M. R. R 5 5 P. C. C. & St. L. Ry 53 208 34 295 P. F. W. & C. Ry 30 30 Wabash R. R 100 269 42 411 TOT ALS 1,770 1,897 567 4,234 * L. S. & M. S. car transfer included in M. C. R. R. figures. NOTE: All figures based on business of March, 1913. 109 Table No. 16. CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS IN TERRITORY EAST OF DESPLAINES STREET, FROM EIGHTEENTH STREET TO CHICAGO AVENUE Railroad .§ A. T. & S. F. Ry.— 12th and State Sts Out 14th and State Sts In B. & O. R. R.— Franklin and Polk Sts In Fifth Ave. and Polk St Out Illinois and Kingsbury Sts.... In — Out Fifth Ave. and Taylor St.... Out C. & A. R. R.— Cable St. and River In Cable and Canal Sts Out C. & E. I. R .R.— 12th and Clark Sts In 12th and Clark Sts Out C. & E. R. R.— 14th and Clark Sts In— Out C. B. & Q. R. R.— Harrison and Canal Sts In 16th St. and Stewart Ave In— Out Canal and Harrison Sts Out 16th and Jefferson Sts Out C. G. W. R. R.— 303 W. Harrison St In— Out C. I. & L. Ry.— Federal and Taylor Sts In — Out C. M. & St. P. Ry.— Kinzie and Kingsbury Sts.... In Wayman and Halsted Sts.... In Kingsbury and Illinois Sts... Out Wayman and Desplaines Sts.. Out Fulton and West Water Sts.. Out 15th and Jefferson Sts Out C. & N. W. Ry.— State St. and River In Grand Ave. and Jefferson St.. In Rush St., near Kinzie St Out 526 W. Kinzie St Out 16th and Jefferson Sts ... Out C. R. I. & P. Ry.— Sherman and Taylor Sts In Fifth Ave. and Taylor St.... In Sherman and Taylor Sts...".. Out 110 mbined House Platform Area uare Feet r Capacity of mse Tracks ea per Car of ack Capacity, uare Feet rs of Freight ily ea per Car of eight, Sq. Ft. 25,069 100 250 65 385 14,457 18 803 15 964 34,920 2,2 1,090 45 775 8,160 5 1,632 6 1,360 22,750 8 2,844 3 7,583 23,400 71 329 52 450 13,950 33 422 24 582 19,770 108 183 67 295 / 64,040 51 1,255 40 1,600 33,383 112 297 110 303 78,922 80 986 155 509 54,356 50,617 78,800 37,513 34 32 173 34 1,600 1,580 455 1.105 64 11 162 5 850 4,600 486 7,500 25,199 46 547 68 370 24,690 52 474 90 271 89,398 48,080 58,164 41,456 31,284 12,000 30 41 18 128 13 7 2,980 1,170 3,225 324 2,410 1,714 10 110 7 170 4 10 8,940 436 8,309 244 7,821 1,200 32,138 42,084 48,480 46,402 29,640 27 17 59 105 156 1,190 2,475 822 442 190 46 82 83 100 70 697 512 584 464 423 23,424 39,355 58,646 36 48 116 651 820 505 30 15 100 781 2,620 586 CHICAGO FREIGHT TERMINALS— (Continued) <0 ^> H~. >+-, Kailroad s st-ss vg jatss v^' ^S G. T. W. Ry.— 12th St. and Plymouth Ct.... In 37,941 14 2,710 74 513 Taylor St. and Plymouth Ct.. Out 41,250 66 625 48 858 I. C. R. R.— South Water St In 63,288 24 2,640 90 703 South Water St Out 55,378 248 223 230 242 L. S. & M. S. Ry.— La Salle and tavlor Sts In 29,650 56 529 100 296 Taylor and Clark Sts In 10,000 6 1,666 5 2,000 Clark and Polk Sts In 11,410 4 2,852 8 1426 Clark St., foot of Taylor St.. In 10.500 8 1,312 10 1,050 La Salle and Taylor Sts Out 51,200 7Z 701 130 394 M. C. R. R.— 120 E. South Water St In 50,000 17 2,940 20 2,500 120 E. South Water St In 31,500 28 1,125 75 420 120 E. South Water St Out 23,200 98 237 110 210 M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry.— 12th and Canal Sts In— Out 165,000 179 921 82 2,012 \ Y C &• St I R R Taylor, 12th and Clark Sts... In— Out 35,485 54 657 69 512 P. M. R. R.— Harrison and Franklin Sts.... In— Out 9,150 29 315 43 213 P. C. C. & St. L. Ry.— Halsted and Carroll Sts In 35,520 26 1,366 46 772 Kinzie and Morgan Sts In 34,800 14 2,485 22, 1,512 Clinton and Carroll Sts Out 18,000 47 383 35 514 P. F. W. & C. Ry.— Madsion St. and River In 62,035 82 756 54 1.148 Polk St. and River In 17,630 18 980 9 1,960 Van Buren St. and River Out 13,925 40 348 22 633 18th St. and Stewart Ave.... Out 25,900 53 488 27 960 Van Buren St. and River Out 24,105 17 1,418 24 1,005 Wabash R. R.— 12th St. and Plymouth Ct. . . . In 62,143 81 766 65 954 Clark and Taylor Sts Out 25,404 90 282 83 306 Note : Figures based on business of March, 1913. Ill o 2 H H O en W H I — I I — I u < M u < o o < I — I K o Q < CO O c (U bo -O ^ •z o »vOcoooc\coot^fo>-ot^co On CN t^ t^ t^ o CO ^ ^H oOio 00 f-H »— tt-H *— (»— (1 — ICO r— t "i jb C 'XIIDDJd O u-)00(MO'0--Hrv.iorO'*co^r^ lZfl3D4DJ roOt^ONON'^O^fOfOCOio^ I. \0 CV) ro ro O Q\ O "TO li-j O O r^ oooocooCJ\or^f^'Oco^'0"^ ■}iiF!i-ii T (n CV) t^ t^ O O u^ C^J O ^ 10 CV) 00 10 ^« 'I ^5 J D5 ( T^ "1^^^ ^ ^ ^.5n O CO ^ r^,rrCoDr-r^"voQ"MDO~-l to Co ;^ o XDJ A,34 V3.iy '- °° CM "—I ■»-! •ONroO'Oioi-Ou-)ror-0 00 I .irj >-0 >0 I > xo CM ro On CO 00 \ -rl- CM m \0 •^ ■* ^,-HCM '— ,(D_3 ^5iif 05^ f/ <^.^^ (^IPd4vj cm® • cMOr^cor^O'^c^cot^ • OC^1VOT-IOOOOO^O^^ . TO ■^Ov^'^r^ MD 0,"\"0^co ' •— r»— 1 1— ' *-^ 1— Tcm'^cm 1-h mH »-h CO I i[3DAJ^ S-IDJ r-H ^ . ,-( )N£5CMOOt^'^C7N'-i )'<*u-50co"*iocMr^ Cv) .-1 '-' ^33 J 3UDnbs (^gg 'p3i4n33Q V3xy pq"^' ,— ( 1-H ' CM »—' coOONOmNO^^OOt^ t^TJ-ONON^HVoO — ij^On cc No^-^-* 10 o.r^_oo CM "^_ ro" co" O" CO >— T CO' '^"lo' CO' u^ ONt>>-^OC3NCO'*co :on CO>hJ • ^i*^ • • rr, Ct: Cd H Cd Cei iQi^- >>CO (^ :^f^ ip^ P^ ■o3 CJPH-C '=^ d b w w "^ =3 1-^ H oa oa oa oa d- , f-H On c CM •T— » NO T) On lU CO U) T-H D Ul p:; CO CO NO CO- ^ ON t-H ca CM CO NT) J ir> t3 C NO S Cv| rt 1-! is JS C^ t/> Of) NO rt OJ T"" Ih < fVl t^ ■^ CM C3 T-H t> H CO 8 T— > CM CO < O c O O a < o 112 113 ov o •o il 1 ■5 < ^ & z: y u o °^ ^ ^ -I UJ a u " h- <: «c ^ f- d£ ^ 1^ ^ u °^ o < d ^ O G- < 3. «c E P 2 y o J ^ r u < e- ^ 02C ^ 002 J 02Tr § ^ 09Z- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ OVT ^ ^ 1"" 02Z s 1 ^ 002 o: 1 ^ ^ 5oyi o § s 1 s _ J. 1 i ~ T" Ofl i s 1'" s 1 021 J. ^ ^ 1 001 5 ? ~ T" i 1 1 i s _ j:: ^ ^ 1 Fl -i- 09 1 1 ^ $ 1 1 1 _ J.. i ! s ^ i 1 09 s ^ ^ ^ 1 S i $ § 1 1 s 5 ^ 1 ^ ^ i ^ ^ 1 1 ot- S i 5 5 ^ ^ ^ ^ 1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ i ^ 1 ^ 5 - -I ^ ^ ^ 1 1 1 1 $ 1 i 1 i 02 1 1 1 1 ^ ! i 1 ^ m R i ^ ^ ^ ^ 5 s 1 i s ^ 1 i M U ^ ? i I 5 ^ ; a: 1*-' iri od H < d c " r : u o IE < o8 O LJ 6 a: u >-■ u q: of a: od } CD c 7 -i o s: j u u cJ C. C 6 ^ cd ^ ^. ^ od a: ^ V- (j T. ':> o >-> '^ a: t J a: a: J Jo of of J d >-= z: IT J ^. «d ^. u X u a: a: >■ . (T a: d cd od r it < 114 115 116 ii; ' Q2L UJ .2 to 069 , ^ S lis 7-1! z: <£ lot 099 r ^ S 1 ^ 1 < ■ ^ V. Ot9 1.1 n ^ V "S- ^- u — >; y 2 oogr H ^ r ^ « 1 5 *" i r c I 0. OLS- CT '^ _ 1 iij H otc C "^ iZ 3 OIS ^ *;; O (0 08V ?-^ O b. OSt^ — o r 1- in ozr < no- u ^ f-o ^ UJ t) 06C ii. .09C o r 0£C 00£ OiZ OW 012~ 081 OCl I 1 ■ OZl 1 1 1 3- 1 1 1 § 1 ■ 06 1 1 1 ^ 1 1 t 1 1 ■ 1 ■ ^ ■ . 1 1 t 09 oc- 0- ISI IS IS S :iis ■1 ■1 1 ■ 1 SI II iSilS ■ ■ Ii 11^ fri It k fc ki Ik kl ^'1' ftf- k ki^ M'S or -. H - u J d 3 fld a: a: < u cd uJ od 6 (J cJ a: . cj a: u 6 c od " U C t DC • a: ^ oil t a: :5 a: a ^ or 2: CO '^ s:- ^ 3 od ttT Qj CO u ./^ J s z cd _i >^ zf J of "^ 2: q: q: ad X 118 009T 1 f 1 5? ^ ? i -1 5 § ■ H ^ «o < ? 5 I 5 ^ «vi r y ^ 7 lo 1 - OOt^ -C >- 002V z: ^ OOOV ^o^5v t^ ^ Qu , < * „ "t Ss| go ^°^ ^. 5 M - 1 < 2 y ^ u i^ u r u r r f= (c n: S ( ) . y ui uj u ^ ^ ^ Z 0- ? "^ ■0 Z 5: < kJ U OOQC (?) ^ 009r C -<3 OOVC" 1 0025- (rt 03 ooor ■:3 iZ oosr 1 -s 0092" 2: 00»^ ei oozr ooor ■n ^ owrr 1 1 oo9r 1 1 1 OOfrT s ^ § ^ i wzr § ^ 1 ~M ^ ^ ooor 009" 009" oof- ooz- t ^ i i 11 i § ■ § |t ^ 1 1 1 1 ]j 1 1 !b 1 J fi 1: — i- ■ - I- 1^ ■^ ■1 ■ f pii ll I 1 lu 1 lull im li in pill p 1 PMI IMM ^K ^1 i«i imi i^ m J^.Mi m^ of X m IC >- oc u: c < c ^-1 c a: , d a - tc s - (J CA y -i _ ce ai _i *^ in zf of a: >■ J d (J it a: 119 Uii 1 p. |i p |ii iii Jii i p pflii p i iirfiip 1 III III III III III III III III III I III In III III III I III III III In >- CE U-- <■ d QQ tc: < 6 I— < tJ (J of u U z: u a: a: dr CD (J a: J »— < U >- DC o cc a: f- i of cJ a: a: u U t a: od J cc ad ± (J a: i2 ., 1-5 - OOS 09Z 092 'T 5 -rr - 8^"^ 1 — 1 — n J UJ.5 ♦1 ■ -or ^' t >;<« d a; 1 c (_• 0^ I uo: HOC > j C o§ oi • ..^ l^- ^ >= ^ : id 6 ou (J 6d J z 1 la a:5 I tt: r < OrOp°o So li. 2^ S# 2i I* 5 ?c ^!^ ^ci iSe ^ . 121 09r ij : <2 H »: •" 09V" — - .0 1 3 2 3! i^ ! -C ovr -5^2 i <0 - £5 5 i -:* I 02V' - ^ .'i u y (J ■3 ^ OOV" — > i Ui I c 51 § i 09S: •■^^ ^< jo r -^ - ^ ?r ^ ° OWT Sp ^< ji?o -3 -?5 E ^S S OEC <^ Q :^' ^ -2 I : r^ U S^a 5! ■" OOC^ k 01 J, ' Si 091 i5 n K C H OS > >" J q; a; 5 .' 5^080 d jS do ttf K V ft; (E 0: «C cr <»:! tfi ^ c fld ? (d z: c id e^s A 3 u u £ . > . li. c b: dj '^ oS 5J^ tfj f^ J ^ I e: ^ 5^ h; 08 M a: • •^ H- (0 >. S j (i Jz 5 £ ^- ■ t a: CL- Ou. to Oar or °g - "J f .o r- o en [J P '^ o »- lO t~ eg o f- o o o o to eg CO u (£ rt w — J ^ a (D lO iO o eg l^ 1 ^ 1 ''^ n (n n eg N to ^ ^ o lO i ^ — — eg eg M to V z f2i o tM CO o o _ o to Csl eg o OO eg 9) cu o> o o h- CM r- (O to 2 '^ o» CO I in CsJ N to *o T '^ o O to Cvl ■«• %t<^ > n £5 51 si II ll M3 6^ >. ^ w Si s> 1 W k^ i o 2 (0 o to 1 ?3 5, TO 1 to Cj CQ n 03 & CQ ^ <§ i3 ^ „ ir O lO _, to «n CM ^i h CM w eo Z 5 1— ^ N „ ^1 -J 1 '" S 2 t- ooo ooo o o %^^ U< lO— Tr TT V to -^ „ n < 03 u to o X z ! hI ss< pg a. 3 3 o 2 o • IO eg (O r- to eg < " "^ CO mtOO . o oot- loor- ooo OO oio<\i OODO 3 (~ ocvjm CO inoos cy oooi lOoOOJ OO ■q-^(0 O— (T> H u. UIO — to -r-O CT-^O ">f 0>CM ffiO ff.«3r- OilOCD < 5 /I < i5i z _1 11^ i: 11 « 11^ 11^ 11^ 11^ m o Z o ■>r (-5 o o o O ? j< o iO o 00 n N o a* 00 o» oj a (D lO o (O O •V 00 esl o> lO (O r- < " o r> OO o tsj m (O r- IO V •^ < J "q- v • o o o 2 X o , ■* b ? lO C: 1^" o o o CO to D o So to •» ■<»■ CO ^J^ ^- E [LI ^ tn to CO hi o o 4D TIO O •^ __ as CO o «) o T tO c S h => o ^ •o o (SI a> (O to eg 1^ CO '* "^ t~ ■* o T to ■<• •o CVJ o o o o O o o o CD O o O eg 2£ o o o « O ■^ o ■^ eg O o o o T o> ■^ ^ O r- r~ Qt o- * o O «o •o •o f t~ eg lO < " o tSJ a> CJ ^ to -^ 00 o «» iD lO eg V (g CO ,!;aS < la i ~> s 1 S s to c c (2 -1 c g c 3 2 c £ 3 z ^ 3 § c D c 1 T3 C s o 1 1 >- Z < s ai >- J < a S § 1 o O H I 1 J g 3 5 5 tn O f- H 2 ^ E- X X X X u UJ O o T^J O . ^ UO o O o <: Q. Z CQ ml I 124 GENERAL RAILROAD STATISTICS RAILROAD STATISTICS. The Eastern District, Southern District and Western District in the following diagrams are the districts into which the United States has been divided by the Interstate Commerce Commission in its statistical reports. The three districts may be defined substantially as follows: The Eastern District comprises that portion of the United States bounded on the west by the northern and the western shores of Lake Michigan to Chicago, thence by a line to Peoria, thence to East St. Louis, thence down the Mississippi River to the mouth of the Ohio River, and on the south by the Ohio River from its mouth to Parkers- burg, W. Va., thence by a line to the southwestern corner of Mary- land, thence by the Potomac River to its mouth. The Southern District comprises that portion of the United States bounded on the north by the Eastern District and on the west by the Mississippi River. • The remainder of the United States, exclusive of Alaska and of island possessions, is included in the Western District. 125 RAILROADS IN UNITED STATES • / PERCENT OF INCREASE SINGE I89O FREIGHT AND PASSENGER TRAFFIC and POPULATION Data from I. C. C. Rettort / / • » ctr\ % / \ / / \ • / \ 1 1 ■ \ • / f / • / / t f 1 ou / ^•^ / * *V" /■ uu • 1 ■• rt f\ / < - / 1 1 n ..-' ' bl ," ^- ?/ i / / / r\/-fc ^1 / / r < / • To/ • tjtr / ""•■* ' ^1 / «1 1 / 3 t /•>r\ • / ^t / a 1 ^ 1 f/ ^ ^ • / ^ ^ ^ A /-\ i > / / A x^ ^ 1 i f t jsS ^, ! i t / ^ ^ TT^ I ^ i^ rtr\ — J / • / J A ^ t 1 f- _^ \ >( f / f \ — \ • YE AR i^ 05 w ^ CO "* x> N ■* CO ao CVJ 06 1-t 03 126 RAILROAD STATISTICS POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES Data from STATISTICAL AJiSTRACT of the DEPARTMENT OF COMMEKCE U.S.A. w>- i / « *W" / on — f 9 1 911 1 • / rn < / - 1 fro / SR / / in / z 4 / r o •-t iK / M f a -1 »o- / t-t * f M H M- > f < / n J B Z r f M ^ / o d f Ed M- / i -^ • Z ^>- / • • / / t«- / ..^ /'" in .** ." YE XR ^' ^ 5 < \ ( 1 ( > < ) < 4 < > 1 < i 5 1 > C 5 < 3 c f ) c • If * f L c 1 ) 4 ( 1 i 4 ( 1 J Q f i 1 C f i( • d c • 4 G f ; 2 < * > c * ^ __ 127 RAILROAD STATISTICS POPULATION OF EASTERN DISTIIICT of tlie UNITED STATES AS CONSIDERED BY THE I.C.C. y ^r> / / » ' / / / / / oo / 1 1 rfcr* , • / i / r AA. # / Btr 4 « ' o Q^ 1 / ^ / a / 24 i f CO H Ort t ^ / 9 / » sr, 20 M * o lO « f ce / s 10 > f ^ / 14 y •« r\ , ^ / * r\ / 10 > f^ a > / y a J / YI AR _/ / A y > < < > < > 5 < ( t 5 < 5 5 < > > < 1 ) ( ( > < < > ) < > r « i * f ) 4 1, -J 4 > 4 I 1 J ■t t } f i i 1. J 1 1 4 1 1 < I < 128 ^^^ OATiDn»r> QTATTQTTna n POPULATION OF WESTERN DISTRICT of the UNITED STATES AS CONSIDERED BY THE I.C.C. ..., i '^O i f / Ofi / < f r Ofi / / 9^ i 1 / * / • / i 9 I 03 / 1 M 1 fi / 1-1 M j r 5t 4^ * / M / 1 A f < i • CQ / * X y M -bb- in / i i O ' 1 1 / p Q / ' z 1 it 4 / / • >» ,^ il __ • ^^ m» < — .' n [ YE AR — c c > T 1 ( c c > < ? ^ < > r < k 5 5 < > i 5 < c } < ( > > 5 c 5 c 1 4 3 1 1 1 f i 1 c 1 j ' < 5 H c ; 1 c 4 c 1 2 1 4 ( f 4 c 5 129 RAILROAD STATISTirs ^^ ■"^ POPULATION OF SOUTHERN DISTBICT of the UNITED STATES AS CONSIDERED BY THE I.C.C. Sw «^ nji ■se • i — r / • to ■fi^ > —95 O h-4 « <-» / / 3 ■T© / a / ■tW i / CO / r g -T^ / 11 / •< s TTC / M > ^•' ^ o ■+6 ,/ X i a ,y .»* 3 y » ft .> • — 6 y »• * .^ .'-^ f^' — B YE AR ( e > •> T c e > c e > < 1 r < 1 5 S < < > 1* < > » < c < < > < < > ( 1 f f 4 < 1 » 4 » ; 4 ( 1 u 4 (J ) 4 a f > 4 1 J. .. t t i 4 t f 4 < 9 4 t 5 130 n A TT xsi\ k r\ CT* f^T CTTn C TOTAL PASSENGERS CARRIED in UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Reports / \\}\ TO- y / wt >fj y • ^ Cfi FT Kr / o «^fl / •J ^t / — w a / M o( >0 / w / ► u u Tt / f s rf/ . 4 A u / • r y«a > o uC ^ / / ■ I / ^ i 01 i f \ 5b • e / / \ / -at ^— / \ h— • s. / 'v •" of ■> < ^ ( J c \ C ff 4 c 1 > * C * ( > 4 < 1 6 4 ( < 1 1 1 » s c f ( T > 131 RATT.nn&n rtatthttph ~ NUMBER PASSENGERS CARRIED IN EASTERN DIVISION of tLe UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Reports [ ' 1 t t or f 1 / 1 m i*f\ n / / 'V '« / oJ»l / ^^ O^ tv 1 / J / oOu 1 • J 1 ,J / ''"I y i 9 4! W / 1 / M Z 4' vv y o M / \ 1 / • M 4 so ^ \ / a / \ / i-i ~4i }0 / « 1 05 «*fc c»/\ / \ / / > ^. / o on > ^ / / S \ ■— •' r' (X. o PS tU cq 3 20 T( in YI AR CI fU c i 9 1 < • « < 1 c 3 < > 3 c c 1 • < J < > ; c ( 1 < 1 i J 4 J » L J * * J < \ f 4 < 4 < 4 < * > 4 < 1 i 1 132 RAILROAD &TATTKTICS ~ NUMBER PASSENGERS CARRIED IN WESTERN DIVISION of the UNITED STATES Date from I. C- 0. Reports — 1 rt r»#\ 1 / » f o Rn i 2 4 / O M 2 RO • 1 a n in / M ( U3 "^n / /^ • C/3 -TA- ■^ in / «5! / b. )o i / g / .JLi 40 /' ?; / _1^ bA / ''•^ / f * / \ « > ,y s^ y • _«i ie- • ^ / 14 ko YI AR 1 c > 1 C I < !• ! ( < ;; ( ( 5 D ( ( 5 ? ( 3 ? { 1 3 — u 1 • u * 4 c f i 4 c 3 ( 1 ( f J < c 1 J ^ ( 1 3 4 < 1 __ 133 RATInOAn QTiTTSTTPQ NUMBER PASSENGERS CARRIED IN SOUTHERN DIVISION of the UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Reports 1 / « flO / • < > '.^ / 7ri / * 70 1 1 1 flR. 1 sr, 1 o M / / 1 1 a / / i 1 M r i c: KO z^' / t / 1 ■Af: y ' 45 / * ^ i _et 40 r " / / 1 1 S 7 30 _^ •"-. <•* / "•> f \ * 30 ""■H f 1 ' 29 f^n YEj IR 1 [ ( J 3 c c 1 > > < < 3 c t c c > c > T 3 \ i 9 5 ( 1 1 \ 1 1 * < c 1 4 1 r~ f 4 — « s 4 c f 4 H 5 1 H ■ " < ^ < 1 B 1 _ 134 DATI.nnAn STiTTSTinS TONS OF FREIGHT CARRIED in the UNITED STATES Data from I. 0. 0. Reports nn ly 1 / • y • i ■ N r / \ / -« « / \ 1 i \ 1 f, 1 • I 1 -* f r\ r\ 1 V] TO J IM ■t J j _] ' 3 1 ■J / hH l^ / Z t o / t- / i 6 is 1 1 / ^"^ / in r\r\ i ' * / a / > J / f] 4 ^. / y \ / X y' \ / / » f \ /-^ (. / V YE \R R C\{\ s w •^ Q 00 o o « ^ CO 00 o Oi 00 r-i __ 135 RAILROAn STATTSTTnS TONS OF FREIGHT CARRIED IN EASTERN DIVISION of the UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Reports . I / \ / \ 1 fk , / \ / • , • / / ■ 1 / / \ 1 / / 1 • , 1 u • V / • / n / • / — .. • Vi • o / 1-1 Tl) U i *> f 3 • / • • / ■T3" H ■OG 0— • / O J 1 / 2 / • [ 1 ^ / B 85 u / 1 \ / • \ f / • \ / ^•v / • • 40 Y ik\ c c > ( 1 i ^ < c ) ( C > < ( > ( ( J ) < > < > < 1 > f 1 1 i 1 H 4 1 ■* 1 H ^ ' H 1 H 1 4 136 RAILROAD STATISTICS TONS OF FREIGHT CARRIED IN WESTERN DIVISION of the UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Reports y / 1 / rr fT / /' \ / OO" / 1 \ / filT^ / /' / / f 4au i .^ / CO A. _ r / 4lJu / I-} / 5i Ouu 1 1 ./ ml / o i 1 .> / Tti / \ o no u / \ ^ / K Ed / ^N f \ ^• y 20 o / X lU u in rt YE AR < > ( 5 5 c 1 5 « < i 5 > ( < 5 < < 4 C r < > < 1 ? < 9 u c 1 4 i "« J > 4 <4 c ) 1 < 1 ( 1 1 H < i 1 5 N 137 RATI.ROAn =;TATTSTTnS TONS OF FREIGHT CARRIED IN SWTHERN DIVISION of the UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Re ports 1 1 / ijii J f • J / 1 1 / • loy 1 / \ / . / "> ( 17 J 1 1 / D a / 'Ji « * rk / f* o -r& 7-' ^ / a -t4 5— / X / 1 as 1 * • o 1 • i O -tS pr^ / \ ! e / f -«- u— r i / -tO 9— / / — ^ 9~- / .^ A • \ / — © 9— / > ■> / — 1 B- — T ^ Y EA] I ^^ B— 1 ( 3 i i 1 i ( i < Q c ) c c \ 4 i < » c ( < > 4 ( 1 D c » 5 b 4 { f ) 4 c t 4 c > * < f A < 1 > 4 < > • * ( 1 4 138 RAILROAD :5TATISTICS NUMBER PASSENGERS CARRIED ONE MILE in the UNITED STATES Data from I. 0. 0. Reports ■ Tfl 1 i > / / T^ / / TO J — 1 / • OA / r o / i t M ca / '^i / r C/3 / 2 CIO / 35 / r nn > / CIi / o i / m 1 W / P / J / / ^^ / \ / / ■w / ^ N y S / 1 ** r- TE AR lU < > I c \ < t ( 5 < 3 < \ < } > < H 3 4 5 > c 5 > i r r 1 < 1 t 1 f A f i M « i * f B < f T * f 4 V I ' 4 f c 1 c f i 139 ^*" RAILROAD STATISTICS ' AVERAGE JOURNEY PER PASSENGER in the UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Reports 1J. / X Wk / ^"^" - V. / \9r / \ ^ 1 / • 11 A r X / W a )0 S5 [•n ( 2 OS / ^ r^n / "^ r u / < 39- i f > / Til nA' \ / o J \ A *X f H '15 "^F. 1 \ / , — \ , ' 1 f 1-4 E^4- s ^ =34^ rE. iR. c t 1 1 C 1 5 t c ^ > c i 1 < i i J ) % ( ? a ^ Q D < ) ( 4 ) a 1 Q \ c I c ) c 5 < i c 5 C b — c > C > C i < > ^^ „ 140 RAILHOAE STATISTICS TONS OF FREIGHT CARRIED ONE MILE In the UNITED STATES Data from I. C. C. Reports e\j Ofi tn V rfci :n i — /^ / O J ■* o lU / rfc/ lA / a yi ' M - < ttf^ i r Ti • / H 1 4 n / f o ^ r ffi / 38 f- JU J V as > / 15 If) / ■• / ir\ y V / / / \ ^ / { o X' i-» Y EAi i. rO < ) 3 c \ > ^ • ) <; > c < > ( c I c c 5 r 5 c > < < 1 5 4 : c 1 > f 4 t ) t f ! 4 1 i c t 1 4 341 ^^ ■^"" BAH.nOAD STATISTICS ^ TONS OF FREIGHT CARRIED in the UNITED STATES TONNAGE FROM OTHER LINES EXCLUDED Data rrom I. C. C. Reports 1 — 1 1 1 kA 1 n in J \ / 1/k )A 1 / / \ / • kO / \ / o M / \ / ^ 'v ^^ \ f a '' n fcA 00 as w S fi, )n / Em O / ec m / n / ""^ ^ ^ )n / f t i^ ^ irt i ^ / LA / f K "^il YF AB i > 1 1 1 I • < 1 e » 1 t > ( t I < ( !• 1 ( s < t > c 1 i ( J ) 4 > 1 1 > 4 ( 3 < 1 s < 1 4 ( ft < * > i < a 142 AVERAGE HAUL PER TON OF FREIGHT TYPICAL HAUL of the AVERAGE RAILWAY Data rrom I. C. C. Reports « ^ a 1 A ^ ^^ \ i ^ I / " 1 j \ / . 1 \ / l^lu 1 1 1 lU 1 1 lU U \ , ^ 1?J 4 \ / ^ i ^ I \ / \ / s / 33 2 , / \ M V i [/ > < / Iz / u o ,^ / c: Ed ~TZ Ct j \ J r •^ / \ / IE 4 / ^ f 1 r ft / 1 If n "^ ] ! 1 1 Q 11 EAR • < < ( f > ( ( 3 < ( 5 ( 1 < 1" 1 f ( ( 1 ( -1 ( 1 L < 1 p ( f 3 4 c •4 ( 1 i ( f 6 ( 1 •4 < 'I < f > < » 4 ( 15 •4 ( 3 H 143 RAILROAD STATISTICS AVERAGE HAUL PER TON OF FREIGHT TYPICAL BAUL ALL RAILWAYS REGARDED AS A SYSTEM Data from I. C. C. Reports n» J Tl / J%V J / rau 1 f . V sa,| \ . > 2a ^ 1 \ J -1 Jri 7- tf-t M J 1 M CT « j 1 -T&}- s 1 ' = 1 > o < n A ^ I / E4 ^ I 1 i /^ \ •< \ \ / o 84 2 \ \ / r H n J ri \ 1 I / 5 as ' / 1^ 1 2a 8 cJ: 1) Y BAl I. -St 4 ( > a c e I ; « 1 ( 1 I-i < r 5 C 1 • r « I c 3 ( ) ( i c « ) t c • 1 c > 4 ( « 5 ( c • > c a 1 \l s ■t c > c 1 1 ( ) < 3 144 ^*' UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 3 0112 062005530