Omaha daily bee., 1896-12-18
SENATE INQUIRY INTO TRUSTS.
Committee Examines District Attor-
nov McEnrlnnc of Ncw York.

| WASHINGTON, Dec. 17.-Thc senate com
mttee on interstate commerce today exam
| ined District Attorney MCFarlane of New
York regarding the trust resolution intro
duced by Senator Chandler The resolution
directed the committee to inquire whether
| the existing agreement of the Joint Traffic
association provides against a competition
by stipulation that every railway company
which is a party thereto shall make and
maintain such transportation rates as may
be prescribed by the board o. managers and
provides for enforcing such stipulation by
fines: to inquire whether such stipulation
is a violation of the prohibition of the law
of congress against the pooling OF froights
or the division OF earnings by interstate rail
roads: to inquire concerning the litigation
pending in the southern district OF New York
regarding the agreement. and whether any
legislation is needed to expedite the proceed
ings and to enforce any violated provision OF
law against the Joint Traffic association. 1t
also directed the committee to investigate
charges that pooling trust agreement with
money fines against violatOrS OF the agree
ment and fixed rates for products exists
among the -four milCrs and window glass
manufacturers OF the country, and whether
or not they are in violation uf the law.
Mr.. McFarlane explained his arguments
and briefs in the suits which he conducted
against the JOINT Traffic association. Mr.. Nc
Farlane said he hoped to get the case
through the circuit court of appeals at the
term beginning January 10, and If the de
partment Of justice would agree to a formal
submission OF the case 1t might be advanced
and decision reached in the United States
supreme court in the early spring. Mr. Nc
Farlane contradicted with some warmth that
injunction proceedings were brought pro
fOrma and without expectation of winning
He declared that he had fought the case
earnestly and upon grounds that he believed
TO be sound.
Mr. McFarlane said one Of the defects of
the interstate commerce law was that there
was no definition of what a pooling of
Ireights was. The United States as party
had right to bring suit against railroads
without an investigation by the interstate
commerce commission. He also spoke of the
doubtful character OF the antitrust law
when some suggestion was made that the
traffic agreement was in violation of that
statute. The suit he had brought against the
Joint Traffic association was to test the agree
ment on its face. and not upon what might
be its intention not expressed Mr.. McFar-
lane said that under the agreement there
was no doubt each road was bound to abide
by the rates fixed by the general managers
of the association and subject to the fine
imposed by the association
Senator Chandler gave a lively turn to the
inquiry by strongly insisting that the de
partment of justice had not pressed the mat
ter with vigor. He called special attention
to articles xvi and xvii of the traffic agree
ment, cOntending that the articles meant that
the association could divide its earnings
among the roads. and that il should have
been Il leading point presented in the case
Senator Wolcott cOntended that the arti-
cles could not be construed 10 mean a diyi-
sion OF gross receipts, because the money
might have been received from the sale o.
bonds, or from any other source.
Other members Of the committee did no,
seem 10 agree with Senator Chandler i'm his
construction of the provisions Of the quoted
sections of the law, but the latter, continu-
ing, insisted that the case was not pushed
with vigor because Attorney General Har-
mon held that the pool engagement was no
doubt legal. Some doubt was expressed
about this, and Senator Chandler 3roiuced
letter in which Mr.. Harmon stated that no !
doubt the agreement was drawn within the
points covered by Judge SymingtOn in the
transmissouri case.
The reference to the trnnsmlssouri case |
caused a little discussion upon II. Mr. Me |
Farlane said that the trarsms3Ouri arrange !
ment does not contain as many strong feat |
ures as pooling agreement as the Joint |
Traffic association but it was fully as strong |
an agreement to maintain rates The latter
ended by Chairman CullOm saying opinions |
upon cases pending in the courts were out OF
place.
Mr. McFarlane next spoke Of the difficulty
encountered in finding judges who were not |
disqualified from trying the case by reason
Of holding etock OF some Of the various com
2anlos who we're parties to the agreement.
VI lhe tlBhl JuuS'S IN thc luIiS1lctiOn where |
the suit was brought, Judge Wheeler wcs
the only one not disqualified for this rea-
son, Senator Wolcott said that it indicated
what wac well known, that profes slonal men
and persons Of small holdings invested In
these securities and collectively hold a largo |
amount. This development seemed to sur
prise the committee which discussed the
question whether or not the supreme court
Judges were disqualified 10 try the case when
Il came before them. M. McFarlluc cy-
he Joint Traffic association It was not sin
guar that judges held stock, and added that
Judge LaCumb had qualified himself to try
he case In the circuit court 0f appeals Sy
lispCsing of the stock he hCd. No action
Ha3 taken looking to further investigation
AZ tha rOu1mtItpp