New-York tribune., 1905-02-04
ATCHISON ARRAIGNED.
Com merce Commission Finds "Ftd-
grant" Violations of Lac.

Commerce Commission on "the alleged unlawful
rates and practices of that road in the trans
portation of coal mine supplies, involving, also.
the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company. The
main points of the decision, summarizing the
way in which it is alleged the law has been
violated and disregarded. are as follows:
The act to regulate commerce requires carriers
to publish and adhere TO their tariffs The
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Com
pany mas for the last five years wilfully and
continuously violated the provisions of this law
in the respects above stated.
February 49, 1908, the so-called "Elkns bin
was enacted, providing that carriers should In
no case transport traffic until tariff had been
published, and that the published tariff should
be observed, and providing penalty OF not less
than 81 GOO mora than $4,000 for each
offence. The provisions of this statute extend
both to the railway company which grants and
the party which receives the concession. Both
the Santa Fe and the Colorado Fuel and Iron
Company systematically and continuously Vto-
lated the provisions of that act I'm the par
ticulars mentioned, from the day of its passage
down TO November q. 1904 when the tarlns
under which this coal moved were reduced IN
all cases 81 10.
1t would seem that the Ell Paso and South
eastern Railway was also in violation or the
same statute during that period, but that com
pany was not a party to this proceeding ana
has not been heard.
1t should be further observed that on March
20, 1902 the United States Circuit Court, in a
suit begun at the instance and request OF the
Interstate Commerce Commission, enJofned the
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Com
pany to observe in all respects its published
schedules OF rates. That company, from the
date of this Injunction down to November q,
1904 was apparently in continuous disregard
of that order of the court in its failure to MAIN
tain these coal tariffs.
STIFLING COMPETITION.
The alleged infractions of the law were first
called to the attention of the commission by the
charges of the Caledonia Coal Company. oper-
ating a coal mine at Gallup. n. NJ. that the
Santa Fe road was discriminating against 1t IN
A contract of the Santa Fe with the Caledonia
Company expired in 1898 or 1899. and was not
renewed. and when 1t attempted to find a mar
ket for it's steam sizes of coal, 1t Is charged 1T
ascertained apparently that coal. both from the
Trinidad region and from the mines at Gallup.
being supplied at a price which about
equalled the freight rate alone from the point of
production to destination" The decision con-
tlnues:
No other individual could do business in
competition with the Colorado Fuel and Iron
Company in this field unless he enjoyed the
same freight rate advantages; when other in
dividuals endeaVored to make contracts in COM
petition with the Colorado Fuel and Iron Com
pany they were compelled to pay the published
rate, and therefore were unable 20 furnish the
COAL and under this arrangement the Santa Fe
company and the Colorado Fuel and Iron Com
pany virtually entered into a partnership in
the handling of this coal, in the execution of
which the published schedules of the Santa Fe
were utterly disregarded
The decision says that number of other |
operators I'm New-Mexico besides Mr. Bowie of |
the Caledonia Coal Company, found 1t difficult |
TO dispose of their products in competition with |
the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company, and the |
commission deduces number of general facts |
from the evidence The Santa Fe company it |
says acted as agent for the Colorado Fuel and |
Iron Company in collecting from its customers |
the price of the coal itself along with the |
freight rate, and the evidence shows that in |
one instance. at least this also done for |
the Victor Fuel Company. Under this ar
rargement the Santa Fe instructed its agents |
to bill coal in certain points at which the Colo
rado Fuel and Iron Company operated to |
various stations on it's system at figures TO be /
furnished by the Colorado Fuel and Iron Com
pany and the practice seems to have been to |
embrace the price of the coal and the freight I
rate in a single item. which appeared on the |
expense bill freight. Continuing the COM
mission says:
FAVORS TO COLORADO FUEL
II the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company had |
In all cases paid the published tariff rate which
was exacted from other shippers the fact that |
the price of the coal and the freight were in
cluded In a single item would have worked no |
pTactcal advantage to that company. far as
we can see. Neither, apparently would there |
nave peen any reason for this arrangement if |
the purpose Of the parties had been honest. r.
however there existed the part of the Santa !
Fe Company an intent to charge the Colorado |
Fuel and Iron Company less for the transporta- |
ton of its coal than the published rate, it is |
evident that this method of billing would af- |
ford ready means for concealing the transac- |
tfon. In point of fact, during the entire period |
covered by this investigation. the Santa Fe |
company did transport coal for the Colorado |
Fuel and Iron Company for less than its open |
tariff rates, and these concessions amounted in |
many cases TO the price of the coal itself
Under the joint tariff filed May "a 1903 and |
effective until November %, 1904, the railroads
parties to that tariff allowed the Colorado Fuel |
and Iron Company a concession all coal |
transported under those joint rates of 81 IL a |
ton. Mr., Biddle. freight traffic manager of the !
Santa Fe system testified that Of the 81 % re-
ceived by the Santa Fe. 81 10 was always paid to |
the Colorado Fuel and Iron COMPANY with the |
full knowledge of the El Paso and Southwestern.
These railroads. therefore. collected the pub |
liShed tariff rate from the Trinidad district to |
destination, and paid back to the Colorado Fuel /
and Iron Company 81 10 a ton of the amount so
collected.
Some suggestion las been made that these
payments to the Colorado Fuel and Iron Com
pany by the Santa Fe were not in the nature of
coal; that the published tariffs in reality incIud-
ed the cost of the coal, but inadvertently omit
ted to state that fact. The record conclusively |
shows the contrary.
SMALL SHIPPERS SCARED OFF
II was said that these rates in favor of the |
discrimination. there was other shipper, |
and consequently actual preference. The |
these rates were actually insisted upon in the |
case of small consumers apparently, but when
ever II seemed desirable to secure a particular |
contract to shade the price. special arrange |
ment was made between the Santa Fe and the |
Colorado Fuel and Iron Company. by which the |
Santa Re agreed TO transport the coal required |
to I'LL that contract for less than this published
rate. Since the greater part of the business OF !
contracts, the rebate was applied TO the greater |
part of its total shipment. Nobody else sold |