The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-12-10
LONDON DOCK BILL
Story of Its Easy Defeat in the
House Of Representatives,
Yesterday.
Fears Of It's Constitutionaity Ex-
pressed-Threats of Higher
Freight Rates Used. - T.

From The Journal Bureau, Room Is, Post Build
ing, Washington. 49,. Il
washington. Dec 10.-The southern
lumber exporters went back on the flour
millers Of the northwest and the London
dock bill was defeated in the house Of
representatives yesterday by a margin Of
nine votes. Five votes had been pledged
to the bill from Louisiana, but they were
cast against it. > The excuse for the
change Was the withdrawal. of the south 4
ern lumber support. In addition to. the
loss OF this strength in Louisiana, there
were losses in Mississippi, Texas and one
or two other southern states. 1t had been
felt ever since the reassembling of con-
gress that the bill was in a bad way
That feeling has been reflected several
times in these dispatches. Friends of the
bill found, upon returning to Washing
ton for the short session, a radical change
OF sentiment. Where the bill had had
many enthusiastic supporters in the last
session, 1t was found to have practically
none outside of the Minnesota delegation
and one or two members from the south.
The situation grew rapidly worse after
the. southern lunbermen had withdra WIN
their support and when yesterdays fight
began there was not friend of the bill
who confidentaly expected victory The
shipping combine working In connection
with the inland carriers. first secured the
lumbermens withdrawal, following which
| tn eChtcago packers also withdrew. Then
! other export interests withdrew until it
! looked as If the millers only among the
| countless number of American exporters
were anxious for the bills passage. 1t is
understood that the arguments made by
the shipping combine to these exporters
included a threat Of a radical increase Of
| freight rates in case tho bill should pass
! The speeches against the bill were filed
=; with misleading statements. Mr.. Adam :
| son of Georgia said that it intcrfered with
| the freedom Of contract; Wagner of Penn
| sylvania said its passage would be a leap
| into the dark for American exporters;
| Adams Of Pennsylvania said congress
should hesitate to change a system which
had worked SO beautifully and satisfactor-
lily to, the American trade; Burleson of
Texas said the proposed change was based
on a mere matter Of bookkeeping and to
pass the bill would not materially effect
i commerce; Burgess of Texas read a tele-
! gram from some Galveston commercial
bodies protesting against the passage CT
the bill and said it was all wrong to tinker
with the right of private contract: Dalzel
! of Pennsylvania said the bill provided for
unconstitutional limitation of:the right OF
private contract. and was the most danger
Gus piece q legislation proposed since
his service in congress commenced. But
two speeches were made for the bill one
! by Tawney of Minnesota and the other by
Richardson of Alabama. Mr.. Tawney
spoke for All hour. Nothing more can be
done this session, but it is understood that
eighth congress a year from now and
), pushed as hard as possible. The flour
). rnillers will be it's principal hackers.
i 49, -. = w. W. Jernlane.