The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-10-07

COAL AND RAILWAY POOLS.
The Pennsylvania Is In No Combination to
Restrict the Output of Anthracite.

Interview with President Roberts.
Mr. Roberts read Governor Pattison's letter
carefully, and then said:
II don't think Lave any opinion to express
about Governor Pattisons administration. This
looks rather like campaign document, doesn't
itY' Then he continued: 1.-The document so far
as it relates to the coal pool, or the anthracite
combination, as the Governor calls it, has no in
terest for the Pennsylvania Railroad Company.
We 10 not and never have, belonged to any such
pool or combination We have steadily and con-
sistently refused to join the pool to be bound
by Its actions"
'The Governor in his letter says that your
allotment for this year by the pool is 3, 500, 000
tons"
1T is not so" said Mr. Roberts 1--WE have
always refused, as l said before, to join any
combination to restrict production. Looked at
simply from a selfish point of view, our inter
eSts are all in the other direction. The Penn
sylvania Company owns controlling interest
in some coal-mining companies, but our interests
as miners are insignificant in comparison with
our interests as carriers. The more coal there
is mined the better it is for US. Our policy is,
and always has been, to stimulate. not to retard,
production. Some time ago while rail makers
vlsed them to adopt ii, and told them that If
they did we would get our rails from abroad.
The coke-producers undertook to restrict their
output by banking their ovens three days IN the
only gave us business three days
IN the week we would not carry
their products at all. Itwould cost practically
as much for cars, locomotives and men TO carry
coke three days in the week as six days. When
we refused to enter into any com mbination to re-
strict the production of coal, some Of the com
panes said that they would not haul our coal
ears except on days that companies in the COM
bination were 1T work. Our answer to that was:
If you won't haul our cars we will lay tracks by
the side of yours and haul our own cars. We
will not do business with a company that Will
haul our cars only three days in the week
don't know whether the coal combination is
illegal or not l have always thought it a mis-
take TO restrict production by combination,
eyenfor those companies which are large min
ers, but do not wish to criticise my neighbors
only wish to speak for the Pennsylvania Rail
road Company"
What abo1t the trunklne pool?'
There is no restriction tonnage. Each
company has the privilege of getting all the
business 1t There is really TO passenger
pool, Or if there is the Baltimore & Ohio is not
IN it. | believe there is passenger pool among
the other companies. AS | said, there is no
restriction on tonnage, but there is an agree
.menT among the companies about rates. 1t is an
attempt to maintain fair and equitable rates.
There would be no pool if the public did not
want it,"
When you say the public, do you mean the
stockholders of the companies or the shlppers!'
NO. mean the public generally. The peo-
pie think that pool among trunk lines is the
only way to give any stability to business. !
don't know whether the trunk-line pool ID Illegal
or not If it is, the Pennsylvania Railroad
Company is perfectly willing to draw out OF II.
think we conld get along without the pool as
well as if not better than the other companies;
and as I said the only reason that the pool
exists is because the public want II. have
been very much dissatisfied with the pooling
arrangement as 1t was adjusted in New York
have thought the Pennsylvania Company
would DO better out of the pool than in it, and
pave thought seriously of withdrawing from
1t, but to withdraw would have such wide
spread effect on the business of the country tna'
hesitated to take the responsibility OF such
grave step on myself. / laid the matter before
lae directors Of the company, and they agreed
WITH me that while it might be better Tor tne