Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-03-01
THE HOUSE.

bers with uplifted arms were clamoring
for recognition, but all requests for unani-
nous consent were cut off by the presen-
tation Of the conference report on the for
tifications appropriation bill, which was
agreed to. The Senate amendments to the
sundry civil bill were disagreed to and sent
to conference under suspension of the
rules.
The legislative executive and judicial
bill was also sent to conference.
The Speaker then recognized Mr. Hatch
to move under suspension Of the rules to
pass joint resolution directing the Sec
rotary Of the Treasury to publish the dairy
tests made at the Columbian exposition.
Mr.. Hatch supported the resolution. It
was opposed by Mr.. Richardson CTenn.).
Mr.. Payne IN. W, and Henderson Qowa).
The bill failed to pass. 1921, two-thirds
having failed to vote in favor of it.
Interstate Commerce Amendments.
Mr.. Storer Ohio was then recognized to
move the passage under suspension Of the
rules. of a bill, with Senate amendments, to
amend the interstate commerce act SO as
to incorporate two criminal sections pro-
viding punishment for violation Of the law.
It imposed a fine of 5000 for each offense
upon any firm or corporation represented
by any person or agent seeking rates lower
than those established, and similar fine
on common carriers accepting freight at
lower than their published rates. The pur-
pose Of the bill, Mr.. Storer explained. was
plain. Under the present law individuals
alone were punishable. The corporations
and railroad companies went scot free. In
several instances minor officials had been
convicted with great difficulty and punish
ed. This change in the law had been asked
for by the interstate commerce commission
for four years.
Mr.. Simpson attacked the bill. He charg-
ed that there was a scheme behind IT to
get the pooling bill through the Senate. He
nod nhors hof cSodf 6o Gor-
ate would put the railroad pooling bill on
as a rider and use 1t a vehicle to get
that Ubiquitous piece Of legislation through
Congress.
purpose. The latter denied that he had
any knowledge of such plan. He could
not say. however, what the conference
would do, but he pledged himself. II
member Of 1t, to do all in his power to
prevent the contamination Of such a
scheme.
An Opportunity for the Pooling Bill.
Mr.. Breckenridge Ry) agreed with Mr..
Simpson that tho danger of passing this
bill lay in the opportunity it would afford
the Senate to railroad the pooling bill
through. He reviewed the parliamentary
situation which would make the matter
privileged at both ends Of the Capitol. Mr.
Springer Qll) protested against killing
good measure because there was danger
that would destroy the interstate COM
merce law in its entirety.
He secuted the idea that such a scheme
could be railroaded through both houses
of Congress within one day Of the close Of
Congress.
Mr.. Mcguire (CaL). Sayres Tex.). WASH
irgton Tenn) and Dockery Cdo.) took the
view of the bill advanced by Mr.. Simpson
and Mr. Breckenridge.
Mr. Patterson Crenn). who had charge
of the pooling bill while 1T was in the
House, supported Mr.. Storer's motion urg-
ing the necessity for the enactment of
proper criminal provisions in connection
with the interstate commerce law. He de-
ried that this was surreptitious ma
neuver in favor Of the pooling bill.
The Bill Lost.
The bill was lost 167-1O3, not the neces-
sary two-thirds.