San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1897-05-21
COMMERCE COMMISSION.
A Communication from that Body
Relatiev to Trusts.

tteldLleV 10 TRUSTS.
Washington, May N.-The Interstate
Commerce Commission has sent to
Senator Cullom of Illinois, long let
ter In response to request for sug-
gestions regarding the pooling bill
The letter says, in part:
The chief purpose of those who urg-
ed immediate legislation under pres
ent conditions is to authorize pooling
and under recent decision Of the Su-
preme court in the TransMissouri anti
trust case as provided in the propos-
ed fifth section, which is identical with
a like proposition in the so-called Pat
terson bill Of the House, No. 1887, first
session, Fifty-fourth Congress. This
we believe, should not be done but
should Congress determine otherwise
and deem it wise to authorize pooling
it should be done only on terms which
will prevent an abuse of the privilege
granted. In our opinion. this cannot
be done except by guarantees secured
before authority to pool is given and
before the contract goes into effect.
carriers, whether by railroad, lake
or river should all be included. Before
being allowed to pool they should spe-
city their rates on traffic or the BUSH
ness to be pooled and a contract, with
maximum rates established, as part Of
it, should be subject to approval by
the commission before taking effect.
The provision in the proposed bill that
the commission may set aside the
pooling contract after it has taken eff
feet and became operative, is mislead-
ing. Another such attempt at annul-
ling contract by the commission will
but result in vexatious, expensive, in
terminate and unsuccessful law
suits"
The remainder of the letter relates
to the details of the proposed law. 1t
continues:
I'm our opinion the authority of the
commission, now that it's authority is
questioned, to determine and order
reasonable rates in cases tried, where
in rates are challenged, should be
granted and stated in unquestionable
terms and proper means provided for
forcing such determination, and, as we
believe, provision of the law making
such determination an order of the
commission obligatory on carriers at
once and until reversed or set aside
by court of competent jurisdiction,
will afford the best guarantee for the
observance and enforcement of such
orders. If such provision for making
the orders of the commission effective
shall be deemed unjusttifiable then
other adequate means should be pro-
vided for carrying such orders into eff
feet"
This portion of the letter is signed
by VIM. r. Morrison and Judson c.
Clements. To it is appended the fol-
lowing: 1--WE concur in the forego-
ing suggestions with the following
qualifications: We would not oppose.
the passage of the foregoing bill pro-
vided other amendments which are
necessary to make the interstate conn
merce law effective were made as part
of that bill. We are opposed to the
passage of the pending bill or any 9TH
er pooling bill until this commission is
given by suitable amendments power
in fact which it is supposed to have
and must have in order to carry out
the purposes, of the law to regulate
commerce. We believe the questions
involved in the proposed legislation are
of paramount Importance and should
only be acted upon with the most ma
ture consideration and that anv lsgis-
lation at the present time would be
unwise. (Signed) J. d. Yoemans, c.
A. Prouty.