Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-01-14
NO MEETING TODAY
LOCAL COAL INQUIRY ALLOWED
TO GO OVER.
What Has Been Shown by the Infor-
nation Given to the Senate
District Committee.

| There was no meeting of the subcommt-
tee Of the Senate District committee. of
which Senator Stewart is chairman, this
| afternoon. There were no witnesses that 1t
was regarded as important to hear, and the
| matter was allowed to go over. Whether
| or not there will be further testimony before
| the subcommittee Is yet to be determined.
but It is believed that in a general way suf-
| ficient testimony has been received to at
| low at least fair deduction as to the facts
about the available supply of coal in the
| District
| President Cassatt's statement shows that
half of the coal usually known as Pennsyl-
| vania railroad coal has in the past been
purchased from independent operators who
now place their coal on the market directly,
| as the Pennsylvania could not agree to
| give them the prices that are quoted at
! tidewater.
| President Baer Of the Reading has writ
| ten that the mines Of his company had not
been worked up to their full capacity on
account of the damage sustained during the
strike, but he expects them to be produc-
ing at full capacity within ninety days.
| 1t has also been testified that 10 per cent
| Of the coal handled by the Reading In the
past, and supposed by the public to have
| come from the Readings mines. belong to
Independents and Is now being marketed d.
! rectly by these independents. in that way
| cutting of the Readings supply.
1t has created great surprise that the So
| Cdlle0 CQal mOnOpOfy, which IL mas Ueeu
believed controlled eighty or ninety per
| cent of the anthracite product, has In this
| emergency shown itself to actually control
so little Of the product.
Inadequate Terminal Facilities
| So far as the local dealers are concerned
the investigation has determined that the
terminal facilities Of both the railroads are
inadequate to meet emergencies such as
| exist at present. The excessively high price
Of coal, running up to $40. has been shown
! to have been asked just before the settle
! ment Of the strike.
| Mr. " Baldwin Johnson claimed that this
price was put on the coal as 1t would take
| that amount Of money to allow him to re-
| place it in his yards Mr.. w. A. Baum.
said in his testimony that at that time the
| coal could not have been replaced for 500
| a ton and that in his opinion that Excess
sive price was not justified.
The committee will be able by the testf-
mony and documentary evidence placed be-
fore it to show to whom the coal Of the
| Pennsylvania and the Reading has been de-
testify-and Mr. Y. Baldwin johnson has
| absolutely declined to give further testi-
mony-it will not be possible to show
whether this coal vas 9, actually solo at the
It has been shown that the independent
coal placed here has. cost on the tracks be-
fore being touched by the dealers 1850
l
! that. according to the testimony. has been
the price during the latter part Of Decem-
| Der and the present month.
All in all, the committee cannot show by
| exact facts, and except in an inferential
| way, whether or not the dealers of this
| city have conscientfously turned over to
| their patrons Reading coal that it has been
| announced from time to time would cost
| consumers but $7.2o per ton. A large
amount of coal has been sold at that price.
| but whether all Of that coal has been put
out on those terms must remain a question.
| Mr.. Johnson's Refusal.
Mr. " Baldwin Johnson sent to Senator
Stewart yesterday the following opinion
| from his attorney. Mr.. ]. J. Darlington:
| Replying to your inquiry of this date. I
beg to say that in my opinion, the names
Of the persons from whom you purchase
quantities which you obtain from them and
| the prices which you pay are strictly and
Enthusiastically your own private affairs,
| which. under the decision of the Supreme
| Kiibourne agt. Thompson Q03 u. s., 1900,
neither house of Congress can require you
| to disclose without violation Of your rights
| under the Constitution of the United States.
| OF course, If you are willing to disclose
| these names that Is your privilege, but
upon the legal question upon which my
opinion is asked 1 am unable to entertain
any doubt wha tsoever."
In his letter transmitting this opinion Mr..
Johnson says:
II have told you that I signed the So
| called Reading agreement, that have sold,
am selling and shall continue to sell the
coal they furnish me at the prices mention
| ed in the so-called agreement. l have al
| ready told you that the supply received
| from the Reading company was less than
| one-fourth of my actual needs; but now
desire to modify this statement by saying
| that 1 have had demands for more than
| ten times the quantity Of coal have been
| able to get from the Reading company. I
| have told you that 1 have received but one
| car of Reading coal during the present
| month; but wish to modify this statement
| by saying that, after looking over my car
I record. I find that. while I have received
| two cars from the Reading company dur
| ing the present month these two cars were
shipped in the month of December, and I
| regret to add that since that time they
have made me no shipment whatever
| period of thirteen days ="
Status Of Witnesses.
The refusal Of v. Baldwin johnson to tes-
| tify further before the subcommittee Of the
| Senate committee on the District Of Co.
lumbia concerning his coal business has
recalled the exact status Of witnesses called
| by congressional committee. The resolu-
noon authorizing the District committee to
send for witnesses and papers, to admins
| ter oaths and to compel the attendance of
witnesses. gives that committee all the
IL.
But the Hallet Kilbourn case has settled
the question as to the right of witness
| before a committee of Congress
! In the Kilbourn case 1t was decided that
| except in cases in which the Constitution
| of the United States specifically conferred
| judicial powers upon Congress-. such as
| judging as to the qualifications of its men,
bers. etc. 1t had no power to compel the
| attendance of witnesses. In the sugar cases
| Chapmen was compelled to testify because
| his case related to information regarding
| the dealings Of senators In sugar stock, and
| It came within the scope of the constitu-
tional provision comforting power on Con-
gress in relation to its own members