St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-03-11

and make it plain that the Great North
ern was not backing up the Nelson buy
ers. MIR. Somers was asked about the
term price lists which he used, and
declared that it simply meant the mar
ket price. They decided the market
price by the prices paid at Minneapolis
and Duluth. with handling and freight
charges deducted. Mr.. SomerS declared
that when complaints reached them that
buyers on other roads were paying
higher prices than the market, his COM
pany would notify the railroad COM
pany on whose line It occurred. He did
not explain why this was so, unless IL
was for the purpose or enabling the
other rOrd to call the buyer down as ne
had done. but his attorney explained
subsequently to a reporter OF the
GLOBE that the object was simply
to allow the the other company to
investigate and be enabled to clear us
skirts of any possible charge that might
he made against it that it was III the
combination or was shading rates to the
buyer TO enable him to even up. The
reason why these complaints OF higher
prices came to the officials of the rail-
road. Mr.. Somers explained, was be-
cause the road had better facilities for
lux Oll - COlISoPOAiNNhSO Wv. V -
the matter. The company was simply
utilized as medium of correspondence.
MIR. Somers denied that his company
paid any attention to price lists or
market quotations furnished by any one
except from the Minneapolis chamber
OF commerce and the Duluth board OF
trade. The company had power to
compel the buyers to pay prices up to
the market, by reason of the contracts
with them for the use OF privileges,
but the railroad company did not
participate in any of the profits of any
of the elevator companies. The COM
pany'S policy was to pay no attention
to complaints of prices higher than the
market. Mr.. Somers could not tell the
manner in which rates from competing
points were agreed upon, but the attor-
ney of the road agreed to have an otfl-
cial present this morning 70 explain IL.
Gen. Barrett here took hand III 10
attempt to show that the price list made
I'D by the Great Northern company was
made on the last wheat sale OF the day
in the market, instead of by tue last
sale of sample wheat. He wanted the
committee to understand that there was
a difference between wheat" and
sample wheat" and it frequently
amounted to considerable sum.
The Elevator Combine.
c. M. Amsden, of the Minneapolis &
Northern Elevator company, was then
called and questioned as to the contract
with G. G.. Wolcott, of LarimOre, by
which the latter was to represent the
former by not operating as a buyer in
opposition to it for five years, and for
which he was to receive $1,000 per an
mum. The contract was outlined in the
GLOBE OF Wednesday, and admitted
having made the contract. Witness was
asked what he meant by list prices" in
the contract.
Mr.. McGhee was on his feet at once
and objected TO the question. He said
under the resolution appointing the
committee it was given 10 authority TO
go beyond the investigation OF the
weighing and inspection of grain, and
the matter of taking grain out OF ware
houses and elevators without inspection.
The committee might just as well try TO
the Sunday closing law in
MINNEAPOLIS or the private business of
LindekeS, Warner d Schumacher as to
go outside the province OF the resolution
in the direction proposed. Beside, the
contract in question had no effect except
in the former territory OF Dakota. 1t
had nothing to do with Minnesota: He
exclaimed:
1.-THE committee might as well go into
North Carolina. 1t has gone far enough
outside of its province already. | want
TO know first whether the committee
will stay within Minnesota, and second,
they will stay within the reso-
luton"
Mr.. Erwin said by its acts the COM
mittee had already passed on this Ques-
ton.
Mr.. McGhee-Because no one object
ed to it.
The Committees Power.
Mr.. Erwin contended that the COM
mittee had power to inquire into any
thing which would throw light on the
subject. The committe has proceeded
on the theory that it would investigate
the whole wheat business of the state,
and to decide at this time that it would
not hear testimony relative to buying
off buyer by big corporation which
buys one-seventh of the crop of the
state would be to stultify itself. All
the collateral issues have been gone
into, and it is a suspicious circumstance
that an elevator company should appear
here by attorney and seek to evade an
examination into such contract. The
committee wants to know the Influences
and circumstances that control the
wheat market.
Senator Smith-Has the committee
ever been outside the state?
Mr.. Erwin-0nly at Superior, and that
is practically Minnesota.
Senator Smith inquired what effect
Dakota contract would have on Mime
sofa, and Mr.. Erwin replied that it was
because a Minnesota corporation was
one of the parties, and il is to be pre-
sumed that its method of doing bust
ness is the same in one place as in an
other.
Senator Smith said he had raised no
objections to anything that affected the
"inlquitous combine" at Minneapolis,
but lie thought this was going 100 far.
Senator Geissell thought the term
"iist price, used in the contract, might
be inquired into SO as to give the COM
mittee a clue which it might follow in
other directions.
Senator Smith said the com mittee
could 20 to Minneapolis and find plenty
of men who could tell all about these
things. There are some of the biggest
wheat buyers III the country III Mime
apolis, and yet not one of them has been
subp9nbed.
MIR. Amsden said the elevator COM
pany had no objection to testifying as
to the contract except that it has been
sued on it, and the case is now pending.
He would willingly tell all he knew
about list prices or anything else eX-
cept as to the contract.
Senator Smith moved to strike the
contract from the record and interro-
gate Nj. Amsden independently.
Mr.. Erwin objected to the motion, be-
cause he wanted to find out the mode of
doing business employed by an elevator
company operating under the laws of
The fact should not be
erased from the record that a Minnesota
had purchased buyer. The
committee might properly release Mr..
from testifyiDg, but it should
not strike out the contract.
Mr.. McGhee contended that the lug
ging-in process, like Gen. Barrett's
stump speech, should have limit. Ii
this contract is outside the committees
jurisdiction it should be erased from
the record Because the committee had