Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-02-07
Mr.. HEARSW1HARG
HEARING IN rHfia clsE AGAINST
THE coal MAIDS.
Argument Before the Insereste Com
90 = br
merce Commission+-Honnpoly and
IN tns
Discrimination Alleged.

The hearing of arguments in the case of
William R. Hearst OF NewaYork against
the anthracite coal-carrying railroads,
growing out of the coal strike of several
years ago, began at the interstate COM
merce commission today Clarence ].
Shearn of New York argued forsthe COM
plainant and contended that pool existed
chase contracts are really rate contracts by
means Of which the railroads depart from
their published rates and discriminate and
that the published rates are unreasonable.
The formal hearing in the case of Will
liam r. Hearst against the anthracite coal
roads began before the interstate commerce
commission this morning This case has
been presented before to the commission,
but not in formal oral argument and grew
out of the coal strike of two winters ago.
The complainant alleged that the defendant
roads had been guilty of violation Of the
act to regulate commerce in discriminating
in favor of certain tidewater cities and
against others. 1t has gone its way through
the courts and before the interstate COM
merce commission, and its final hearing in
argument by counsel for both sides is ex-
pected to result in a decision by the COM
mission as to the legality of the charges
preferred.
Present at the Hearing.
Mr.. Hearst was represented by his at
torney. Clarence J. Shearn, other counsel
and officials present at the opening being:
Judge ]. H. CampbelL Philadelphia and
Reading; Robert w. De Forest, Central
Railroad of New Jersey; George F. Brown
ell and Adelbert Moot, Erie Railroad; Wal
ter w. Ross, Delaware, cLackawannaa and
Western; Lewis Carr, Delaware and Hud-
son Railroad; John T. Kerr New York, On
trio and Western; Francis I. Gowen, Lee
high Valley.
Prior to the opening of the argument
Judge Campbell read deposition of John
J. Jones, of Philadelphia, coal freight
agent of the Philadelphia and Reading
which showed the current coal tariffs of
the Reading, and which was intended to
correct the record on certain statistics in
troduced by the complainant. The case
having been threshed over before there
were no persons present at the oral argu-
ment except those directly interested in the
hearing these constituting only the law
yers arrayed on both sides. All of the
commissioners were on the bench.
Mr.. Hearst's Three Propositions.
Following Judge Campbell, Mr. shearn
addressed the commission in behalf of the
complainant. He laid before the body three
propositions, as follows: That the six re-
spondent companies are parties to an ille-
gal pooling contracth whereby Interstate
freight traffic and the Earnings thereof are
divided among them in agreed proportions,
in violation of the act to regulate COM
merce. The second proposition recited that
these six companies, by means Of a device
embodied in the operation of certain con-
tracts, in effect fixing the transportation
rate on anthracite coal from the mines to
tidewater and other Interstate points,
claimed to be coal purchase contracts,
departed from the published tariff charge
and unlawfully Disseminated against ship
pers of coal who were not parties to the
contract.
Mr.. Shearn complained in his third prop
cstion that the published tariff rates of
water points. such, as -Batttmofe Washing
ton and New England, are tunreasohaDly
high and do not bear a. fair relation to the
antecedent cost OF the traffic or to the COM
riercia. value Of the freight. He stated
that the increase made in the price of an
thracita coal by the defendant roads during
the past five years means an additional
burden upon the public of more than $io,-
COO year and that the transportation
of this coal furnishes ope-half the revenue
OF most of the roads SO engaged. Conf
plant was made that such a course as mas
been pursued by these companies is cal
culated to transform this great business
into grinding monopoly, whose inevitable
accomplishments are injury and distress to
the vast community using this essential or
life and business. He said that the rail-
road coal company is. merely device to
evade the law and that the coal company
and the railroad company are practically
Identical What is owned by one is owned
by the other. he said:. and what is re-
ceived and paid out by one directly affects