The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1903-07-02
CONFUSION WORSE COMPOUNDED.


The Joint Committee of the Municipal Assembly
which has been taking testimony in regard to the
bridge arbitrary" has made its report 1t would he
more accurate to say reports because there are al
most as many different reports submitted rs the COM
mittce has members It. cannot he SAID. therefore,
that the issue is any clearer than it was before the
committee began its work.
The report submitted - Councilman Gibson, In
view of the fact that :. extended and more
particular in its references to the various phases OF
the existing controversy. may properly be accepted
that of the various reports which most merits
serious consideration. The observan reader will not
overlook three important points i'll this one of the re
ports. 1t will be noted that Mr. Gibson frankly ad-
mits that the pending terminal ordinances would IN
themselves bring many compcnsating advantages to
the city: that The total abolition of the bridge ar
btrary is not feasible and finally that the one real
power the city possesses to enforce the Legislation he
recommends is resort Ia the Sherman antitrust INV
Mr.. Gibson seriously recommends that the city
should he put in the position of saying to the four
teen proprietary lines Of the Terminal Association
that it will appeal to the National Government for
relief under the Federal statutes if the demands of
the Municipal Assembly not accedcd to and that,
the other hand it will say nothing at all about the
antitrust law if the railroads accept the stipulated
terms. The report. however, makes no comment
upon the important legal fact that the municipality
of ST Louis has nothing to do one way or the other
with the enforcement of the Sherman antitrust act
If the Terminal Association is violating the Federal
law, the city of st. Louis has neither the power to
set the processes of the law into operation nor to
guarantee immunity.
What is still more important in the present juno
ture is that all the power that the Federal Govern
ment possesses and which can be made effective to
modify any of the methods of the Terminal AsSocia
ton. of the railroads for which it acts be en-
forced quite effectively after the enactment of the
pending terminal bills as would be possible if these
bills defeated 1t is not explained why the city
of ST. Louis. and particularly its business interests,
should reject the great and unQuestionabe benefits
to be derived from the proposed legislation. when
this rejection in way whatever strengthen
the power of the city to free itself from those inron-
veniences and commercial bandicaps that the pro-
jected improvements of the tcr.cN facilities would
admittedly remove The members of the Joint Com
mttee disagree regarding the things St Louis should
ask for. but there is neither denial nor disagree
about the benefits the city would derive through
the passage of the pending bills
The controversy has ceased to be one in which
the Worlds Fair Company has any special interest.
The contract which provided for the completion of
the work before the opening of the Worlds Fair has
been Cancelled and the issue before the people of ST.
Louis is therefore, uncomplicatcd by consdera-
tons affecting the great Exposition. Ietrevabe in
jury has been done through the inaction of the NIu
nicipa Assembly, both the Exposition and the
business interests of St Louis must suffer great
losses through inadequate facilities for the handling
of passenger and freight traffic. 1t remains be
| seen what compensation those who brought this
lamentable result about secure offset 1t is
for them prove that they have done the city good