The heart of the railroad problem: The history of railway discrimination in the United States, the chief efforts at control and the remedies proposed, with hints from other countriesParsons, Frank
History
The heart of the railroad problem: The history of railway discrimination in the United States, the chief efforts at control and the remedies proposed, with hints from other countries
Parsons, Frank
Railroads -- Freight -- Rates -- United States; Railroads and state -- United States
This arrangement was, in view of the rates charged shippers from other
points and other consignees at El Paso and Deming, a clear violation of
the common law and the Interstate Commerce Act. A Federal injunction was
served on the Santa Fe in March, 1902, forbidding departure from the
published rates, and the Elkins Bill was passed in February, 1903. The
El Paso arrangement was not at the start a defiance of injunction or the
law of 1903, but became such by its continuance after their issue.
General Traffic Manager Biddle and General Freight Agent Gorman sent out
general orders in March, 1902, and February, 1903, that the law was to
be obeyed, and that “no departure therefrom will be permitted so far as
this company is concerned,” but the law was not obeyed nevertheless. A
general order of a railroad manager counter to the financial interests
involved does not seem to count any more than a Federal injunction.
The El Paso agreement was by no means the only breach of law in the
case. Even the discriminations in respect to shipments between New
Mexico points were in direct violation of settled principles of the
common law.
The Commission found that the Santa Fe acted as agent for the Colorado
Fuel Company in collecting from its customers the price of the coal
itself along with the freight rate;[192] that for over five years (July,
1899, to Nov. 27, 1904) the railroad had paid the Colorado Fuel Company
a rebate of $1.10 to $1.25 per ton on shipments to Deming; that the
railroad and the Coal Company have “systematically and continuously”
violated the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 and also the Elkins Act of
1903; and that from March 25, 1902, till Nov. 27, 1904 the railway had
been in “continuous disregard” of the order of the United States Circuit
Court (in a suit begun at the instance of the Interstate Commission)
enjoining the railway to observe its published schedules of rates.[193]
Commissioner Prouty says: “In all my experiences with railway operations
I never saw such barefaced disregard of the law as the Santa Fe railroad
and the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company have manifested in this coal
case. For years the railroad company has received less than its
published rates from the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company while its
competitors have paid higher rates.”
The counsel, Judson and Harmon, employed by the Government to examine
into the “alleged unlawful practices of the Santa Fe in the
transportation of coal and mine supplies” reported to the Attorney
General, February 28, 1905, as follows: “From August, 1902, until
December, 1904, the railway company continuously transported coal for
the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company at less than the published rates then
in force, from various points in Colorado and elsewhere to El Paso,
Tex., Deming, N. M., and other places, to which such transportation was
interstate commerce.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account