The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-12-08
And Urges It's Adoption as n PopuIaA
Measure and to Put an End to
Alleged Frauds.
WARNINGFROM Mr.. UPDEGRAFF
WHO FEARS THE LAW WILL HURU
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
other Members Also DenOunce the
Proposition, but the House Adopts
1t by a Vote of 119 to 1O1.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 1.-THE House to-
day passed the anti-ticket-scalping bin by
a vote OF 119 to 101. This action is the cul-
mination of ten years struggle on the
part of the railroads to put an end to the
business of ticket scalping. The Interstate
commerce Commission first called attention
to the subject in it's report of 1888. and II
has been before Congress ever since in ona
form or another. During the last session
extensive hearings were given to the repre-.
sentatives of the railroads and the scalpers,
and Mr.. Sherman, of New York, secured
ia pledges for the measure. 1t was how
ever deemed inadvisable to bring the meas
ure forward until the present session. The
debate to-day lasted four hours, and was
spirited upon both sides. None Of the
amendments offered was adopted and the
bill passed as reported by the committee.
When the bill was taken up Mr.. Sherman
explained that it was very similar to the
one passed by the House during the last
Congress. The charges were mainly re-
strictive upon corporations. The bill re-
quired the carriers, subject to the inter-
state-commerce act, to provide each agent
authorized to sell tickets with a certificates
and made it unlawful for any officer of such
carrier to supply tickets to any but author
lied agents. 1t made violation of these
provisions a misdemeanor, and provided for
the redemption of unused or partially useG
| tickets, and also provided penalties for
forging or altering tickets. Mr.. Sherman
said this legislation had been repeatedly
| recommended by the interstate-commerc
committee, that it had the support of the
newspapers and commercial bodies, and
that over 1900 petitions in its favor had
Tod 10, fI1o d1fr riner a
present Congress. The business commune
ties had come to look upon the ticket brok-
erage business as illegal. The amount Of
fraud practced, If known, would startle
any one unfamiliar with the facts.
Mr.. Brundige (Dem-, Ark.) offered as an
amendment proviso to the effect that the
act should not apply to tickets that are is-
sued by any railroad or other common carr
rier for the purpose Of being transferred.
In explaining his amendment Mr.. Brundige
declared that the real purpose Of the bin
was to prevent certain railroads from place
ing tickets in the hands Of scalpers for the
purpose of being transferred. The provis
sion relating to forgery was unnecessary
Every State had statutes against the issue
of forged instruments.
TWO SOURCES OF OPPOSITION.
Mr.. Hepburn CRep., Ia), in advocating
opposition to the pending measure, the
ticket scalpers who made money out Of the
business and certain railroads who suc-
ceeded through the scalpers in violating
the interstate-commerce law. He said there
were roads which did 95 per cent. of their
business through scalpers, and he appealed
to the friends Of the bill not to allow the
amendment to prevail.
Mr.. Mann (Rep. Ill), said there were
some weak roads which would not be able
to compete with their strong rivals except
through the agency of the ticket brokers.
For some years, he said, there has been
movement for the passage of law 20 legalv
ize pooling of freight rates This was bin
to authorize the railroads to pool their pass
senger business This legislation, he said,
was in the interest of the largest and
strongest railroads.
Mr. Bland (Dem. MOI, said he favored
the Brundige amendment, but was opposed
to the bill as a whole. If the amendmene
prevailed he thought the friends OF the bill
would lose interest in it. The purpose OF the
bill was to legalize pooling of passenger
traffic and to take away from the States, as
far as possible, jurisdiction over this sup~
ject
The bill was opposed by Messrs Little
(Dem. Ga.) and GiIlet (Rep. Mass.) The lat
ter said that all the court decisions thus far
had been in the direction of the unconsti-
tutionality of the proposed law. He said
scalpers could not do business If the rail-
roads did not supply them with tickets
Mr. Corliss (Rep Mich), said that this
bill would not prevent discrimination u
would simply transfer the right to discrimi-
nate from the scalpers to the authorized
agents. He gave notice Of an amendments
he would offer to make any authorized
agent of any railroad equally liable with
an unauthorized agent for selling tickets
below published rates.
Mr.. Updegraff (Rep. Ia.) made warm
speech in opposition to the BILL He could
not, he said, allow so monstrous a PROPOSE
ton as this bin contained TO pass without
a werd. 1t ought TO be entitled a bill to
suppress competition in passenger trafic.
He had loved the Republican party had re-
joiced In it's achievements. 1t had done
much to elevate mankind. and WAS now
riding high on the tide of popularity. This
bill would mark the beginning of its de-
cadence. Its passage would impair. in tbs
minds OF the masses, the honesty and integ-
rity of his party.
Mr.. Marsh (Rep. Hl). and Mr.. Connolly
CRep. II.) both opposed the bill In vlgor-
Gus manner.
Mr. Hepburn, in charge OF the bill. replied
to its critics. 1t was not designed to stine
competition.
On a rising vote the Brundige amends
ment was defeated--70 TO SS The vote was
then taken by yeas and nays. The amend
ment was defeated-l0l to 122. The vote