The San Francisco call., 1896-12-20

the companies to pay or submit to fore
closure. They did not pay, and this ur-
gent proposition is to relieve them of the
alternative. That is all. The only defect
so far developed in the Thurman act is
tnat it does not vest jurisdiction in any
particular court (nor in any court in my
opinion) over the interest of the United
States Government in the roads. Ii any
change in existing law is needed it is that
jurisdiction be vested in the Supreme
Court of the District of Columbia or some
other particular court to adjudlcate and
determine the interest OF the Government
in the roads.
"The gentleman from Iowa (Hender-
sony says the question is how to get the
most money for the Government. That
question should properly be discussed
when the bill is up for consideration on
its merits. It is the question presented
by the bill. That may be the ultimate
question, but the gentleman IS mistaken
in stating that the Secretary OF the 1nte-
rior (Smith) suggested refundlng as the
best method. He did not. He stated be-
fore the House committee and tes-
titled before the Senate committee
that in his opinion foreclosure was the
best means of getting the most money for
the Government out of the roads. Messrs.
Anderson and Coombs, Government di-
rectors of the Union Pacific Railway Com
pany, who have investigated the matter
fully, in ike manner stated and testified
that in their opinion foreclosure is the best
method of procedure for the protection of
the Government. Mr.. Coombs, Govern
ment Director of the Union Pacific Rail-
road. testified before the Senate Com
mittee and stated before the House Com
mittee, that $l20 100000 can be obtained
by foreclosure sale of these two roads,
which would net the Government about
$50 600, 600, which is at least $40 900, 900
more than it will ever get if the bill how
proposed TO be given consideration shall
pass. Mr.. Anderson, Government Di.
rector of the Union Pacific Railroad and
author of the majority report of the Paci-
fic Railway Commission, in which refund
ing was recommended. as stated by the
gentleman from Iowa Henderson,, testi-
fed before the Senate Committee during
its hearings last spring that he had
changed his mind on that subject and that
III nlS Oplu1Oli QlO otlO AOb 4SAun0-
ing was the best remedy.
The Presidents message to Congress
at the opening of the present session
urged action, or rather declared that il
action be not taken by Congress by tie
1st of January next there would seem
then to be no further reason for delaying
foreclosure proceedings.
at seems TO me that neither this House
nor the country bas anything to fear from
that alternative. The House and the
country may we'll permit every reason
which has heretofore influenced the Presi-
dent to delay foreclosure proceedings to
be removed by the failure of further Con-
gresslonal action in the interest of these
companies. Let the course of judicial
procedure ordinarily adopted in such
cases among citizens be followed. For my
part l am not only opposed to the bill,
but opposed to the consideration of it. It
is neither necessary nor useful"
At the conclusion OF Judge Maguires
remarks the rule was adopted without
division