unanimous in their opinion that some legislation tending to amend the interstatecommerce act so as to enable the Commissioners to enforce their decisions was most desirable, and that some legislation looking toward the above end should be passed. A committee was appointed at that meeting, of which the Hon. Charles M. Betts, of Philadelphia, was chairman, and the committee has made a report that after a careful examination of House bill No. 8337 they believe that said bill is entitled to the active support of every member of the National Wholesale Lumber Dealers' Association. We accordingly write you to use your influence in favor of the passage of this act. A recent decision of the Interstate Commerce Commission in favor of the National Wholesale Lumber Dealers' Association, in a matter brought before the Commission by the association on behalf of members interested, brings home to the lumbermen the importance to their business of the interstate-commerce law, and we are anxious to impress upon you gentlemen representing us in Congress the necessity to encourage such legislation as will enable the provisions of the law to be more effectively carried out. It is of vital importance to our business interests that some such legislation should be enacted. We therefore call the matter to your attention and earnestly request that you give this matter due consideration, advising us of any suggestions you may have in regard to the best method of our cooperating with you in this important matter. Very truly, yours, MERSHON, SCHUETTE, PARKER & Co., By F. E. PARKER, Treasurer. 37. Letter from Hon. Martin A. Knapp, chairman of Interstate Commerce Commission. Hon. STEPHEN B. ELKINS, WASHINGTON, D. C., May 9, 1902. Chairman Committee on Interstate Commerce, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: The Interstate Commerce Commission responds as follows to your request for a report on Senate bill 3521 and Senate bill 3575, which were referred to the Commission for that purpose. The bill No. 3575, known as the Nelson bill, contains substantially some of the specific recommendations of the Commission in its report to the Congress for 1898. As to subjects covered by this bill, it is identical in scope, and nearly identical in phraseology, with the measures then proposed. This bill is approved by the Commission for the reasons stated in said report and other reports to the Congress. This does not imply that the Commission would insist upon everything contained in this measure or object to its modification in some particulars. For example, the Commission is not strenuous about the minimum fine provided in the first section, which amends section 10 of the present law, or the number of days within which certain things are required to be done by section 2, which amends section 15 of the act, or the limitation upon the suspension by the court of the operation of an order made by the Commission during the pendency of proceedings in review, as provided in another part of said second section. What is meant is that the Commission approves the substantial provisions of this bill and would not favor changing them in important respects. Nor is this bill recommended as a complete and sufficient measure. It would not cover the changes that ought to be made nor fully adapt the law to existing conditions. It would, however, in the judgment of the Commission, be a great improvement upon the present statute and distinctly aid the purposes for which the law was enacted. The bill, No. 3521, though differing materially in form and excepting the second section, appears to have substantially the same purpose and to accomplish substantially the same changes in the present law as the Nelson bill. If this assumption is correct, the bill 3521, with some modifications, which would doubtless be acceptable to its author, would meet the approval of the Commission, except the second section, though the form of the Nelson bill is preferred. That is to say, it seems on the whole better to amend specifically certain sections of the present law than to enact an independent measure, although the same results were contemplated in one case as in the other. As to the second section, which confers rights of contract between competing roads not now allowed, the Commission is not agreed. A majority of its members believe that amendments of this kind, with proper restrictions and connected with other needed legislation and not otherwise, should be adopted and would aid the success of public regulation. One member of the Commission, however, is unwilling to recommend any legislation which would legalize the combination of competing carriers. Those who favor the general principle and purpose of this second section are not satisfied that the restrictions and safeguards now contained in that section are adequate to prevent an abuse of the privileges proposed to be granted. This statement is designed to show the general attitude of the Commission as nearly as may be to the bills in question. Individual members may supplement this with the expression of their personal views either in written communications or in oral statements before the committee, if the latter course is preferred. Very respectfully, MARTIN A. KNAPP, Chairman. Concurrent resolution of the twenty-ninth general assembly of Iowa relative to the NelsonCorliss bill. [Presented by Mr. Allison, May, 10, 1902.] I, W. B. Martin, secretary of state of the State of Iowa, do hereby certify that the attached instrument of writing is a true and correct copy of a concurrent resolution passed by the legislature of the State of Iowa in relation to the Nelson-Corliss bill as the same appears of record in this office. In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the secretary of state of the State of Iowa. Done at Des Moines, the capital of the State, April 30, 1902. [SEAL.] No. W. B. MARTIN, Secretary of State, By D. A. HITES, Deputy. PREAMBLE AND CONCURRENT RESOLUTION IN RELATION TO THE INTERSTATE-COMMERCE LAW. Whereas it is generally believed that the effectiveness of the interstate-commerce law has been seriously impaired by certain decisions of the Federal courts, and that the law in its present state is practically inoperative in remedying the evils of the transportation service of the country, which was the purpose of its enactment; and Whereas a bill designated as H. R. 8337 and S. 3575, known as the Nelson-Corliss bill, is now pending in the two Houses of Congress to amend the interstate-commerce act by conferring upon the Commission created thereby additional powers for the purpose of enabling it to enforce the provisions of the act and giving its rulings immediate effect pending review by the courts: Therefore, be it Resolved by the senate (the house concurring), That the Senators and Representatives in Congress from this State be, and are hereby, respectfully requested to give said measure careful consideration and to use their efforts in every proper way to secure its early enactment or the enactment of some other measure which will afford the relief sought. [Adopted April 9, 1902.] 39. Resolution of the Chamber of Commerce of New Haven, Conn., favoring S. 3575, an act to regulate commerce. [Presented by Mr. Platt, of Connecticut, May 23, 1902.] Hon. O. H. PLATT, NEW HAVEN, CONN., May 15, 1902. DEAR SIR: At the meeting of the chamber last evening the following preambles and resolutions, upon the recommendation of the committee on railroads and transportation, to whom the subject had been referred, were unanimously adopted: "Whereas there is now pending before the United States Senate and House of Representatives an act to regulate commerce, generally known as the interstatecommerce act, as more fully set forth in Senate bill No. 3575 and House of Representatives bill No. 8337; and "Whereas a careful investigation of these bills prove to the satisfaction of the members of this chamber that their passage would result in great benefit to the entire community at large: It is therefore "Resolved, That the Senators and Representatives from this State be earnestly requested to give the above-mentioned bill their active support and to exert their influence in every proper way to secure its enactment; and be it further "Resolved, That copies of these resolutions be forwarded to our Senators and Representatives immediately upon their adoption." JOHN CURRIN GALLAGHER, Yours, very truly, Secretary. 40. Resolution of the Commercial Exchange of Philadelphia, Pa., favoring legislation providing for uniform inland rates of transportation. [Presented by Mr. Quay May 31, 1902.] Hon. MATTHEW STANLEY QUAY, Washington, D. C. PHILADELPHIA, April 29, 1902. SIR: At a meeting of the transportation committee of the Commercial Exchange of Philadelphia held Tuesday, April 29, 1902, the following preambles and resolution were unanimously adopted: "The COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE, "House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: "Whereas the necessity for such legislation as will give uniform inland freight rates to all shippers of like commodities, and provide such penalty as will insure a full observance of the interstate-commerce laws, has long been apparent to every commercial locality; and "Whereas there are now pending before the Congress several bills of amendments, each possessing its respective merits: Therefore, "Resolved, that we hereby respectfully petition the present Congress to pass such legislation as will bring to the commercial interests of this country the much needed uniform inland rates and provide effective penalties against all violations of the laws, thus guaranteeing stability of rates to those whose business is dependent upon inland transportation." Respectfully, yours, ARMON. D. ACHESON, Secretary. Resolution adopted by board of directors of Illinois Manufacturers' Association of Chicago, praying for the passage of House bill 8337. [Presented by Mr. Mason, June 4, 1902.] Whereas it is almost the unanimous opinion of men competent to judge, as expressed in private conversation, in public speeches, in carefully prepared newspaper and magazine articles, and in testimony given before Congressional and other committees of inquiry, that no combination of capital, whether in the hands of individuals, firms, or corporations, is dangerous to the public welfare unless the parties controlling such capital are given an undue advantage over others by means of railroad rates or special transportation facilities which are denied to their competitors and the general public; and Whereas this opinion finds voice and echo in the heart of the average American citizen, since he asks for nothing in the conflicts of business life but "a fair field and no favor;" and Whereas the Constitution of the United States, as interpreted by the decisions of the Supreme Court, gives Congress complete control over interstate commerce, to the extent, if need be, of passing upon their tariffs for the railroad corporations, subject only to the limitation that such tariffs shall be just and reasonable; and Whereas it is competent for Congress to exercise this power; it is competent for them to delegate it to a body established by themselves for the express purpose and charged with the sole duty of exercising it; and Whereas when the interstate commerce law was enacted it was supposed to be stringent enough to remedy the abuses in transportation matters which had even then grown unbearable, but this opinion has been shown by the experience of the past fourteen years to have not been well founded; and Whereas there is now pending in Congress a bill known as H. R. 8337, introduced in the House of Representatives January 9, 1902, by the Hon. John B. Corliss, of Michigan, amending the interstate-commerce law, and which has been so carefully drawn, under the light of the decisions of the United States courts, that if enacted into law it is confidently expected will so strengthen the interstate-commerce law that it will fulfill the purposes for which it was originally intended, and that the Interstate Commerce Commission, acting under it, will be able to protect the honest railroad corporations from the cut-throat rates of unscrupulous competitors, as well as from the rapacity and greed of hitherto "favored shippers," and at the same time will be able to secure to the general public the same fair and equal treatment at the railroad ticket and freight offices of the country which they now receive at its postoffices and custom-houses, and to which by law they are entitled: Therefore, be it Resolved by the board of directors of the Illinois Manufacturers' Association, That the speedy enactment into law of H. R. 8337 is demanded by every consideration of the public welfare; and we do therefore respectfully and earnestly urge the Congress of the United States to enact this bill into law during the present session of Congress. And be it further resolved, That copies of the foregoing preamble and resolutions be forwarded to the Senators and Representatives of the United States Congress from the State of Illinois. 42. Memorial to the Senate of the United States, by the Commercial Club of Duluth, Minn., in favor of the Nelson-Corliss bill. Hon. MOSES E. CLAPP, [Presented by Mr. Clapp, June 6, 1902.] United States Senator, Washington, D. C. DULUTH, May 31, 1902. 4 DEAR SIR: At a regular meeting of the members of the Commercial Club of Duluth, held in the clubrooms Wednesday evening, May 21, 1902, the following resolution was adopted: "Resolved, That the Commercial Club of Duluth, Duluth, Minn., hereby approves of the bill introduced in Congress known as the Nelson-Corliss bill, and requests the Representatives of the State of Minnesota in the Senate and the House of Representatives to give said bill their active support, and exert their influence in every proper way to secure its enactment. "Resolved further, That a copy of this resolution be sent by the secretary of the club to the Representatives of the State of Minnesota in the Senate and the House of Representatives.” Yours, very truly, ALBERT L. PRESTON, Secretary. 43. Memorial opposing the passage of the Elkins bill, legalizing pooling, by the Atlanta Freight Bureau: [Presented by Mr. Clay, June 16, 1902.] Whereas our attention having been called to a bill now pending in the United States Senate, known as the Elkins bill, the purpose of which being to legalize pooling of freight by the railroads of this country, which we believe would be greatly to the disadvantage of both shippers and producers: Therefore, be it Resolved, That the Atlanta Freight Bureau is opposed to the passage of said bill, and that its traffic manager is hereby instructed to write Senators A. O. Bacon and A. S. Clay and Congressman L. F. Livingston, requesting them to use their best efforts toward the defeat of said bill. 44. Memorial against the passage of the Elkins bill, by the directors of the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce. [Presented by Mr. Clay, June 16, 1902.] Whereas Senator Elkins has introduced in the United States Senate a bill which legalizes pooling of freight by the railroads of this country, which we believe would be greatly to the disadvantage of both shippers and producers: Therefore, be it Resolved, That the directors of the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce are opposed to the passage of said bill, and the secretary is instructed to write our Senators and Represenatives in Congress, asking them to use their best efforts for the defeat of the measure. Resolved further, That the secretary be instructed to communicate this action of the directors to other boards of trade and commercial bodies in this section, and request them to take the same action. 45. Resolution of Buffalo Merchants' Exchange, praying for favorable action on Senate bill 3575. Hon. STEPHEN B. ELKINS, [Presented by Mr. Elkins.] BUFFALO, N. Y., April 12, 1902. Chairman Committee on Interstate Commerce, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SIR: I inclose herewith copy of resolutions adopted by the Buffalo Merchants' Exchange relating to bill which has been referred to your committee. On behalf of the Buffalo Merchants' Exchange I beg to express the wish that the bill referred to in these resolutions may receive the careful and favorable consideration of your committee. I am, very respectfully, yours, F. HOWARD MASON, Secretary. The original interstate-commerce act has been interpreted by the United States Supreme Court in various cases so as to greatly restrict the powers of the Commission to effectively accomplish the results intended by such act. Bills have been intro duced in the Senate and House-known as Senate bill No. 3575 and House bill No. 8337-which are identical, and having for their object to confer upon the Interstate Commerce Commission authority to make effective its administrative orders, and giving to the defendants the right of appeal to the United States courts, and which continue to limit the authority of the Commission to the correction of rates when it appears, after investigation, that such rates are unreasonable and discriminative; and these bills also repeal the provision of the present interstate-commerce act relating to imprisonment for violation of said act, and in place thereof providing for fines to be imposed for violations thereof. These amendments we believe to be essential for the proper administration of the duties and purposes of the Interstate Commerce Commission: Now, therefore, The Buffalo Merchants' Exchange urges upon the Interstate Commerce Committee of the Senate favorable consideration of Senate bill No. 3575, and upon the Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee of the House favorable consideration of House bill No. 8337, having for their purpose the amendment of the interstate-commerce act, to the end that favorable action may be taken thereon at this session of Congress, and that the secretary be directed to transmit a copy of this resolution to the respective committees of the Senate and House of Representatives, the Senators from the State of New York, and the Representatives in Congress from the county of Erie, requesting the cooperation in securing such legislation. A true copy. F. HUVAN MASON, Secretary. |