Arizona republican., 1905-06-05
REFRIGERATORCARS
The Objections of Com mission Men to Them
Some Facts Brought Out at the Late Investigation by the Senate Inter. state Commerce Committee.

Washington, D. C., June 4.-(Spe- cial)-In the course of his brief but ! eloquent defense of the operations of the private refrigerator car systems before the senate committee on inter state commerce lately A. R. Urion. Of Chicago, general counsel of the Armour car lines, pointed out that the courts had never yet been given 'n oppor- tunity to pass upon the vital question as to whether or not these companies were common carriers or whether they were or were not already under the interstate commerce act. He quoted Justice Brewer, of the United States supreme court to the effect that the character of the service and not tbE character of the carrier determined whether the service is interstate com merce or not, and stated that no court had ever ruled on the question as tn whether the furnishing Of ice for the refrigeration of fruits or vegetables jn transit was the act of a common carrier or not. "Why legislate on question which may come before the courts he inquired, when the courts may hold that we are common c9r- riers? Or, when, if you do lzgislate to make us common carriers the courts
 
 interstate commerce?" He argued fIT- ther that if the private car lines were common carriers there was plenty of law to deal with them and there was no necessity for further legislation.
 MT. Urion explained the reasons why the commission merchants, represented by E. M. Ferguson, of Duluth, and George F. Mead, of Boston, were SD consistently antagonizing the private car lines Before the introduction of the refrigerator car the commission merchants handled goods on commits sion and stood no chance to lose, but with the refrigerator car the fruit buyers went into the fruit growing districts and the commission mer' chants were compelled now to buy on their own account and operate on their own capital instead of that of the shipper and grower. On the other hand. these car lines have developed the fruit industry, created a greater demand for fruits, broadened the mar ket and brought the buyers into the orchards, all to the great benefit of the fruit growers. He called the at tentiOn of the committee to the signi- ficant fact that not single grower had appeared to protest against the operations of the lines, while a dozen or more had appeared to testify as to the incalculable benefits they had re- ceived from the use of the refrigerator cars.
 Taking up the subject of exclusive contracts. MT. Urion pointed out that the courts had declared them to be legal, citing the case of the Pullman car company in Texas and other exclu- sive contracts made by the railroads | ernment itself.
 He showed the absurdity of the pro ponents of the proposed legislation in attempting to make such d stir about exclusive contracts by quoting records showing that the first exclusive con tract made by the Armour car lines was with the Southern Pacific rail- road in 1897 and had been a matter of 1 common knowledge ever since. The Pere Marquette contract had been dis cussed in newspapers and magazines for years, as had the contract with l the Georgia Central and other roads. Most of these contracts he said had been made as the direct result of the request of the growers to the rail roads.
 'T merely want to show that there is more than one side to the question, " SdlO MT. Or1On SarCaSJlCalIN.
 Illustrating the hazards of the busi- ness, he referred io the losses of the North Carolina strawberry growers during the present season which will cost the Armour lines from $75,OO0 tC s1OO,OOO, and where a representative o' the company is now adjusting the claims with a committee appointed by the fruit growers themselves. He also instanced a case in Idaho last year when the ice houses burned and the company was unable to procure the re- Quisite supply of ice; in North Caroli- na last year, where the crop was SC heavy the proper number of cars could not be secured, and other cases where the car lines had to respond in dam ages to the shippers. He thought the proper parties to make a complaint would naturally be those who paid the charges, namely the shippers anC growers and as they had not done so little attention should be given to tht statements and mis- statements of Oth- CT parties based on theories instead O.
 an actual knowledge of the situation.
 MT. Urion then presented the rec.
 ords to show the attitude of the inter. state commerce commission toward
 private car lines. He thought the agi
 tation conducted by the commission
 was responsible for the misapprehan
 sion in the public mind concerning tn.
 private car system. They had con,
 ducted one investigation CT another
 but notwithstanding all the efforts O
 the railroad attorneys and the attor
 neyS of the private car lines, they haC
 been unable to secure from the com
 mission an order which would enabl,
 them to take the matter into court ant
 obtain a judicial decision. Although a
 the recent hearing in Chicago an at
 tempt had been made to secure an or
 der from the commission based on pre-
 vious testimony or to have the com
 mission drop the case pending the out
 come of the agreement between tn,
 Pere Marquette railroad and the ca
 line company under which the charga
 would be reduced from 15 to 30 De