The San Francisco call., 1905-05-17
President of the Car Lines
Company Admits That
1t Has Exclusive Con-
tracts With Railroads
MONOPOLY OF TRAFFIC
IN WEST AND SOUTH
Small Shippers Must Accept
Whatever Transportation
Tariffs the Trust May
Elect to Put Into Force


WASHINGTON. May 1s.-Before the
Senate committee on Interstate Com
merce which is investigating railroad
rates President George r. Robbins, of the
Armour Car Lines Company, to-day ad-
mitted that the company had twenty or
thirty exclusive contracts with railroads
for fruit transportation business, and
acknowledged a monopoly of that traffic
in parts of the West and South.
Wherever these exclusive contracts
applied, he admitted, producers and
shippers of fruit had to accept the
rates laid down by the Armours.
He claimed that his company was a
private one and therefore not subject to
the Interstate commerce laws. These
exclusive contracts with railroads, Roo
bins said, were generally private con-
tracts, though they were exhibited when
requested. He asserted that the Armours
did not get any advantages over other
shippers in these cars. Replying to Chair
man Ellxins, the witness added that his
company did not want to be subjected to
the Interstate commerce laws
1T seems" interjected Elkins, that
you want all the advantages and none of
the responsibilities of common carriers. "
According to the witnesses, the Ar
mours have 200 articles known as packing
house products which are transported in
Armour cars.
"You control the transportation of these
products in the private cars?" asked Sem
ator Kean.
Not control: but the Armours ship
their products in these cars"
Robbins admitted that on roads on
which they had exclusive contracts, like
the Pere Marquette line, the roads could
not engage in the shipment of products
covered in the contract, in other cars
Those who complained on this matter, ne
added, were mostly receivers and commits
sion men, and not the producers and
shippers
Senator Foraker examined Robbins as
to the cost of icing car from Miohi-
gan to Boston, and the latter figured that
it would cost $50 per car.
Isn't it a matter of fact" asked the
Senator. that ice costs only about S25
per car
Robbins would not admit that this was
true The Pere Marquette line. he sug-
gested. had reduced rates from 81 80 to
IS per car and the Armour line had made
a like reduction.
Senator Dolliver asked Robbins regard
ing the business of the Armour car lines
and its earnings.
Robbins insisted that the company
VISA a private one and ought not to be
compelled to expose it's books or earn
ings any more than any other private
company.
"Unless we should consider that you
are a public carrier the same as rail-
road company remarked Senator Dolli-
yer.
Robbins denied that the Armours
were interested In any of the fruit
companies in California or that the Ar
mours had n monopoly for the trans
pOrtation of California fruits, acknowI-
edging, however, that his company had
n monopoly of the fruit transportation
in the Pere Marquette region and in
Georgia and Florida.
The Armours, he admitted, had ex-
elusive contracts with all the South
Atlantic Coast railways, exclusive con-
tracts In East Tennessee and In certain
roads in Missouri, Arkansas and on the
Southern Pacific road. The Santa Fe
was a competing line I'm the fruit busi-
ness In California. Fruit producers and
shippers on these exclusive lines had
to accept the rates of the Armour Conn
pany, but Robbins said they satisfied
so per cent of the shippers.
Senator Clapp asked number of ques-
tions as to the position of Robbins in
acknowledging an absolute monopoly and
yet Withholding information as to the
business and claiming immunity from the
Interstate Commerce Commission laws.
Robbins maintained that his position was
justified