The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-06-23
CRITICS ASSAIL
ROOSEVELT IDEA
Interstate Commerce Commission
ers Declare President Made
Measurements.
New York World Arraigns the
President-Bryan' s Commoner
Asks Questions.

Washington, June 23.-The summary
~.,anner in which the president disposed
of the Santa Fe case and vetoed the
prosecution of Secretary Morton, which
was advised and urged by the special
counsel employed to ferret out the
facts, has aroused the antagonlsm OF
the Interstate commerce commission,
which referred the record in the case
to the department of justice for action,
firmly believing that it constituted
ground for criminal proceedings.
The members of the commission think
too well of their jobs to give out any
formal interviews on the subject, but in
private conversation they do not hest
tate to express their real opinions.
They say the president has not stated
the case fairly, and that he has not
told the truth regarding Mr.. Norton s
connection with it.
MIR. Morton's ''Courage."
IN his letter Of absolution to Mr.
Morton, the president told him that he
(Morton) and he alone, had the cour.
age to go before the Interstate com:
merce commission in the packing house
products case, and give the facts re-
garding the whole system of paying Sc
cret rebates by the railroads.
At the interstate commerce commits
sion it is declared that this is not the
fact. It is said that after subordi
mates had denied the existence of the
rebating system which the commission
ers knew was in full force, they decided
to pay no more attention to the small
fry, and summoned the highest off
cials. The officials held a conference
before they appeared to testify a'n't
MI. Morton, it is stated, was only one
of many officials who admitted the gen
eral payment of rebates, and told how
the system was worked. These comics
sions were made in the fall Of 1901.
Not Fair Comparison.
, The commissioners also say that thu
president resorted to misrepresentation
when he put the case of the Santa F.
on the same footing with that Of thu
International Harvester company. II
the latter case the western railroads
including the Burlington, North West
ern, Rock Island, Wisconsin Contra
and Chicago Great Western returned ;
certain percentage Of the freight pay
ments to the harvester company, in con
sideration of the fact that It owne,
its own switching tracks at Chicago
These payments were not denied, tn
railroads claiming that they were legj
innate. The interstate commerce com
mission held that they were excessiv
and constituted, in effect, a rebate
When. the general injunction agains
the payment Of rebates was secured, tn
harvester case was included, tho it wa
not specifically mentioned.
Rebate Cases Differ.
The roads interested have compile
with the injunction, but have above
the harvester company rebate of $3.5
car, which the commission fixed as
reasonable allowance. In the case i
which Mr.. Morton is interested tn
Santa Fe, published a freight tariff O
coal Of S .O5 a ton. By a secret al
rangement, this included the price O
the coal, $1.55 ton, which was rebate
to the Colorado Fuel & Iron compan,
The Injunction which was secure
against Relating was, aimed at this pa:
ticular case, but the Santa Fe COZ
tinued to pay the rebate for long tim
after the injunction was issued. Thi
In the opinion of the commissioner
makes 1t a very different case from thu
OF the harvester company.