Standard Oil Company; Trusts, Industrial -- United States
Wishing to know if the Louisville and Nashville would unite with other
roads in making through rates to him, Rice asked the question of
its freight agent. He replied: "I do not see that it is any of your
business." "It was undoubtedly his business," the Interstate Commerce
Commission says, sharply; "and his inquiry on the subject was not
wanting either in civility or propriety." When Rice asked the same road
for rates, the officials refused to give them to him, and persisted in
their refusal.[409] Like Vanderbilt before the New York Legislative
Committee, they seemed to think excuses to shippers were a substitute
for transportation, and evidently thought they had done more than their
duty in answering Rice's letters. But as the Commission dryly observes,
their answers to Rice's letters did not relieve him of the injurious
consequences. In attempting to explain these things to the Interstate
Commerce Commission, the agent of the railroad said:
"If I have not made myself clear, I--"
"You have not," one of the Commission interrupted.[410]
The refusal to give Rice these rates was an "illegal refusal," the
Commission decided; "the obligation to give the rates ... was plain and
unquestionable." This general freight agent was summoned by Congress to
tell whether or not lower rates had been made to the oil combination
than to their competitors. He refused to produce the books and papers
called for by the subpoena. He had been ordered by the vice-president
of the road, he said, to refuse. He declined to answer the questions of
the committee. Recalled, he finally admitted the truth: "We gave them
lower rates in some instances."[411]
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