New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-02-13
THE PACIFIC RAILROADS.

in the affirmative Senator Blaine.
THE PACIFIC RAILROADS.
THE PRO RATA BILL CONSIDERED by THE HOUSE
CoMMITTEE-ARGUMENT IN ITS FAVOR BY ARrk-
MAS II. HOLMES OF COUNSEL FOR THE REcEIv-
Frs AND BoNDHOLDERS OF THE KANSAS PACIFIC
WASHINGTON, Feb. 1.-THE House Commit
tee on Pacific Railroads to-day to hear arguments
the bill recently introduced in the House to denne
the meaning and amendment of the Acts OF Congress
providing for the opera Of the Union Pacific Rairoau
and its branches continuous line, without discri
natioD. and known as the Pro Rata BILL The dinereht
railroads interested represented by the counsel ana
officers OF the companies and q delegation OF Leading
business represented the commercial interests OF
ct. Louis Among those present were Sidney Dioh'
President Of the Union Pacific with his counsel Juige
Shelabarger and Mr.. Poppleon; Robert +. Carr Gen.
eral Manager OF the Kansas Pacific. with Judge j. r.
Usher ARENAS II. Holmes and Mr.. j. L. Wool
worth. counsel for tho receivers and bondh0lders
Of the Kansas Paci6c Horace White, on be-
half OF the first mortgage bondholders OF
that company; d. NJ Edgerton, President Of the Denver
Pacific; Samuel r. Parrish, counsel for the bondhoders
OF the Denver Pacific; Mr. Hewitt, General Manager OF
and Mr. Of the
Missouri Pacific Benjamin W. Lewis, OF the st. Louis,
S 6H1s Gy aIa M the mpn
together with Ex-Governor Z. o. STANDARD. George
Blaine president OF the Merchant Exchange on S
the business interests of the Southwest ,
OF Missouri who had introduced the bin in the House,
referred to the objection OF Mr. Poppeton at the pre-
reciprocal in is operation upon the several roads but
evidently aimed only at the Union Pacific lie sad
panies of the Pacific Railroad system thu
duties and obligations prescribed by the ac,s
thcm and he was apprchensvc he had said. that the
remedies provided In the bill as introduced by him
would he insufficient account Of involving protracted
Judicial proceedings. Accordingly lac presented
amendment meeting r Poppcton's objection, and pro
viding for more summary remedies.
In accordance with the order OF proceeding. as prev
Ously determined by the committee. the case OF the
Kansas Pacific was then opened by Mr.. A1ternas H.
Holmes, Of New.York who read at length from recent
decisions OF the United states Supreme Court,
showing that the scheme Of the Union Pacific
Railroad and its branches originally conceived
political measure for the purpose OF binding the DIFF
erent parts OF the country more closely together faci
Eating commune alton between them and the iTansporta
ton OF troops and supplies for the Government. lie
explained the several provisions OF the acts showing
how these great objects sought TO he accomplished
and particularly how by the Of the OF 1862
and ls6i the Union Pacific and all Of It's branches were
made continuous line extending from the Missouri
River 10 the Pacific Ocean, and be operated together
without discrimination by against any OF the others
by OF through trains ana equal advantages ana n
ctcs in all other respects lie proceeded to show how.
IN the practical operation the Union Pacific road,
all the traSCcutlucutal fiainC was lnfuNn over It's
one line from the Missouri RIVER NJ Omaha, 70 Ogden,
It's point Of connection with the Central Pacific, and how
the branches were excluded from all PARTICIPATION
therein. After pointing out how The main line ana
branches were thus broken mp into separate AID distinct
lines. he referred Ia tne manner IN which the
Union Pacific Road established and enforced III crnina.
ting lie charged that, Tor certain classes ol
freight the Union Pacific made rates from chicago 10
Ogden which forms the western half OF its road, high
as and in higher than, over It's whole road
from Omaha 10 Ogden.
wheItupon SIR Holmes produced the official tarh OF the
Union Pacific. from which appeared hat In respect 20
classes OF frei.ht MS hgh rates were chhfgel
for TRANSPORTATION Onchaf tho road as over us
whole road and in some cases even more. Mr. Holmes
then read from The recent decisions OF ur thed i'e
Supreme Court holding that the Union Iacic could not
legally break up the whole line into fra mcniS ANA
operate fragment with scparat" trains OH different
schedule time aud ~ different rates OF charges from
those made for another fragment. $50
number OF the committee here suggc sted that the
GuesOns prnpnscd for legislative were sven
A. should De- determined by the court, and Mr. PpIpcion
month II the had not been dsuisse IN an
swcr 70 which, Mr.. Holmes explained the dlhcultlr-
involved I'm the judicial proceedings, ana
read "A VOlum.uuu- correspondence recently hiu III
respect OF the eau argued last Fail at Omaha, bv which
it appeared that Judge Dillon hearing the de-
ccd To- decide because the President Of the mon
ai.o appeared that the Union Pacific Company
refused 10 acccde to thc suggt -tiun1 mat
The ease be heard IN March by Justice Mil
Ter who expressed hi- Willingness To expedite thc ctuc
i'm tho s irene court where the question would he
speedily and finally settled In conclusion. MI Homes
argued that the time had arrived III the contest ne
tween the public and the Government ON thc one hanu
aud the railroad companies, who were the creature.
OF tnoir creation and the recipients az thrir nunE"
bounties on the other. when II must lie determined
whether the Government should control the companies
further hearing Of the matter was ADJOURNED uiIti
Friday.