The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-04-24

Tor the better protection ana preservation
OF such rights and interests.
Also resolution calling on the Secretary
Of the Treasury for information relative
TO the fur seal fisheries In Alaska.
BY Mr. Morrow, OF California: To exc
cute certain treaty stipulations pro-
hibiting Chinese immigration also au-
thorizng the Secretary OF 'the Navy
10 make surveys In the Pacific
ocean todetermine the existence Of and
position OF dangers in the track OF COM
merce and navigation, and for the purpose
OF ascertaining proper locations for sub
marine telegraph cables.
by Mr.. Anderson, OF Iowa Directing
the Acknowledgement 10 commence judi
cial proceedings against the Union Pacific
Railroad company.
This being the day devoted 20 the con-
sidcration OF bills relating TO the District
OF Columbia, Mr.. Ilemphill, OF South
Carolina, moved that the House go into n
committee Of the whole upon such meas.
ures; but the friends of the river and
harbor bill defeated the moiion-yeas b,
nays l66.
Mr. llomphill yielded to the expressed
sentiment OF the House aud surrendered
the floor, and The House then went into
committee Of the whole Mr., McMillin, Of
Tennessee, in the chair) upon the river
and hnrbor bill.
MIR. Bouiello criticised tho scheme Of im-
proycmcnt Of the Galveston harbor, and
quoted from speeches made in 1888 by
Messrs. Reagan and Mills, OF Texas, do
mandatory Of the manner In which the
money was being expended there
Mr.. Grain and Mr.. Stewart explained
that the scheme Of improvement OF the
harbor had been materially changed since
1885, and they earnestly advocated the
continuation OF the improvement OF one
Of the greatest harbors Of the country.
Mr.. fonn offered an amendment In.
crcasing from SIS, 900 10 81 the appro-
priation Tor the harbor at Cleveland. q.
lie stated that the LANCER amount could
probably be expended during the year
upon the brcakwatcr at Cleveland and that
the smaller sum would be OF no benefit.
Mr.. Gnosyenor said that as a member OF
The committee on rivers aud harbors he
would stand by tho hill, but II was due 10
his colleague TO say that his amendment
was based upon later estimate than that
upon which the committee had acted.
Pending action the committee rose and
the House adjourned.
INvEsTioATioS OF Trusts.
The HOUSE committee on manufactures
today resumed lis inquiry into the subject
al trusts Before taking mp the inquiry.
Mr.. scott. representing the Pennsylvania
Railroad company. read a subpoena which
had been served upon the Pennsylvania
Railroad company, calling for the appear.
nnce II about ten oi It's principal Oilcrn
Ia 81
contracts between the Pennsylvania and
other railroad companies. concerning the
transportation Of oil. Mr.. SCOTT said that
the Subpoena must have bcen drawn bv q
person outside oi the committee. who
desired b. prt information o. institute a
private lawsuit lie held that the railroad
company should not be called upon for
such extensive information, which would.
h. said, take a large number Of employees
60 secure and half train Of cars 10 trans.
port Ia Washington.
Mr.. r. H. Gowan, Of the Reading com.
pany. then addressed the committee. lie
said that lac had been requested by the
committee aud had consented 10 act as
counsel for them In the prosecution Of
trusts. and particularly the standard oil
trust. lie proposed. by the information
AaliAtA ~ ~ FAN iflA " tfNAAf
10 provo that the railroads. aud among
them the Pennsylvania ruad, hal been |
guilty Of determinations by which the /
Standard Oh company had maintained |
Of the production Of oil. To |
show this the committee bad suhpcnaed |
eight az ten officers oi the pennsylvania |
railroad company, who could give the de- |
sired information. II wished particularly |
to secure copies Of contracts 90 carry oil |
and receipts, showing rebates or allow.
unccs 90 any company. This information !
WIS necessary 10 Huccrwiuily prosecute |
the inquiry into the subject and without
h the continuance of the examination
would De farce. II the Pennsylvania
company had committed no wrong this
investigation would do them no harm.
lie asked whether the committee would
refuse to investigate the charge of dis
elimination, because somebody might
bring % civil lawsuit out Of any ini6rma.
ton adduccd by ihc inquiry.
"