The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1905-12-15

mission 10 revise a given railroad rae
upon complaint. and If they found IL
unjust, to substitute in lieu. thereof a
Just and reasonable rate, which should
be considered TO be good and go into
effect and continue in effect until re-
vissd by the courts
The second section provided merely
for the proposes appeal from the or
der Of the interstate commerce con-
mission on any disputed point TO the
supreme court Of the United States.
This was all there was to the Davey
bin.
The idea of rushing the Democratic
members Of congress into a caucus
to discuss and debate a measure which
had been three times demanded in
the Democratic platform. and the idea
Of asking them to commit themselves
even in a quasi manner was nothing
short of ridiculous.
The measure itself, as It Stood was
more notable for what it omitted than
/ for what il contained There was not
word in the bill about the power OF
the commission to regulate joint rates.
There was not a syllable in it to rem
/ edy the private car line devices. There
I was not line in ii TO regulate or linn
! it the system Of swindling the people
/ along the line of what is known as the
/ terminal fees. There was not in the
I bill that which would enable the in
/ terstate commerce commission to ex-
anime the books of the railroad COM
+ panies; to see how they were keeping
! accounts and whether or not they
were defrauding the people by jus
Cling those accounts. There was moth
\ ing prohibiting midnight rates and
! guarding against every feature of rail-
road devices for changing published
/ rates without giving notice.
There was no provision for a fine
/ for the violation of the proposed law
Each and every one Of these salient
/ features were embraced in the Hearst
bin and it had been on file in. congress.
/ before the committee on interstate and
/ foreign commerce, as far back as Feb
ruary, 1904 Mr.. Williams should have
been familiar with The salient fea-
lures Of the Hearst bin and conse-
I quently should have guarded against
committing the Democracy to any
such a measure as the caucus Davey
bin. But as the story goes. Mr. VIII
liams entertains a bitter personal an
Il tagonism tOwaHi Mr.. Hearst ard did
/ everything in his power to strangle the
i Hearst bill in the last congress.
/ Surely the Davey bin, which was
about to DE forced into the limelight
OF this hurried caucus, was not sucn
a measure as the Democrats would be
willing TO adopt as a fiHality.
Several members who had signed
the call for the caucus had their names
stricken of al the request of Mr.. Viii
liams friends on the ground that
John Sharpe Williams has gotten
himself into hole and we must let
him out OF it"
Mr.. Lamar declinei to take ais
name from the caucus call, saying
that if Mr.. Williams wanted the eau
Gus recalled, let him do it himself.
He and others were truly amazed on
this conspicuous Monday of the eau
Gus when on a majority vote of the
house they learned that Mr.. Williams
intended to rush the Democrats into
a caucus that night on the railroad
rate question oWhen not single mem
Der Of it was prepared to discuss the
measure.
After the bill left the caucus. ana
after the hearings before the commit
I tee on interstate commerce had been
finished, the latter made two reports.
u The first was a majority report signed
by Republican members proposing to
use a Republican measure called the
I Esch-TOwnsend bill. The second re-
port was made by the minority Demo
cratic members and they reported the
caucus bin of two sections plus the
I hve sections which the Democrats on
the interstate committee had added.
N If the caucus bill was sacred how
4 could the committee dare to touch it:
| And when they had amended the bill
by adding five sections to make il
somewhat complete, they dill It in
{ obedience to the latitude given them
by the Democratic caucus.
When the bill reached the house Il
was still so imperfect on the last day
, Of debate, when the Townsend
{ bill was exhibited that it was voted
: down, and John Sharpe Williams ac
i tually took the floor and implored the
! Republicans TO allow him TO aid three
sections to his bill, one covering termt
nal fees and another private car fees
From all of this it would appear that
the caucus action was not in fact final
, nor was it understood to be. When
, the Democratic minority members re-
ported the Davey bill, which was the
caucus bill of FIVE sections. Mr.
ShacklefOrd. from Missouri and Mr
Lamar, from Florida, merely made a
subsidiary report on the Hearst bin
as embracing remedial legislation
which they hoped finally to see be-
come effective This dill not place
I the Hearst bill on the calendar Of the
) house, because the committee was lin.
! tied TO a majority and minority bill
, The only effect Of their action was 10
, have the printed reports laid upon the
desks Of members for informal con
sideration
! When Mr. Lamar addressed the
: house ne addressed it on the Eseh
Townsend bill, the Davey bill and also
on the features of the Hearst bill
There was nothing informal or irregu
: lar in his entire attitude toward this
+ measure. He voted for the Davey biz
. T in namc1rc- ~ ada r. ~ uo,-f,,. - 4