The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-06-22
Rejected by President.

81 did not take this advice for two
reasons First: If it were not for Mr..
Morton IS being in my cabinet, neither
you nor would dream Of following
could not follow it save on condition Of
also following it in the case of the har-
vester company and in all similar cases
which, in my Judgment, would put us
in a wholly untenable position. Sec
ond: I have received from Mr.. Morton
a letter, Of which I enclose you a copy,
it you will see that Mr.. Morton not only
states in the most uneguivocal manner
that he had no knoWledg eaWhatever of
the unlaw Unlawful f practice 80 emfalalned OF,
s1 nS it, iSsned unasr lis aifgStibH, nat
all such unlawful practices were specifi-
cally forbidden by him and that the at
tention of his subordinates was repeat
edly called to the necessity Of comply
ing with the law in this respect. When
there is thus not one shadow of testi-
mony against him, and when whatever
evidence has been submitted shows ex-
plicitly that he is not guilty, it seems
to me that there is no. warrant what
eyer for for our {. proceeding against 'S'
The Beef Trust Cases. w.,
eff you at any time get legal evil
dence Of any such wilful and deliber-
alto violation by any officer of the At
Gibson. Topeka & Santa Fe, or Of any
other railroad running west OF Chicago,
Of the injunction in tho Colorado Fuel
case, or Of the injunction in the Inter
national Harvester company case,, you
will, Of course, proceed as you have
already proceeded in the Chicago beef
packing cases. But at present not
only has there been no such evidence
produced, but there has been no at
tempt to produce such evidence; and,
as regards Mr.. Morton, there is seem
ingly conclusive testimony to the con-
! "In both this Colorado Fuel case
= and in the International Harvester
case, direct that proceedings for con-
tempt against the companies be taken
4 by the government .Whether,Aas the
G dnyiduai vs Officers Become necessary
must depend in each instance upon
whether testimony is obtained showing
that such Individual officer has either
,, by act or connivance been personally
guilty in the NATTER
Morton Himself on the Case.
In letter to President Roosevelt
dated June last, Secretary Morton
reviewed the rebate case at length. He
: explained that the arrang cement re.
ferred to was entered into in 1901, prior
to the. time that the restricting orders
enjoining western railroads from cut
ting rates or departing from. the pub
< lished tariffs were issued and prior tc
+ the passage of the Elkins bill. He ther
goes on to explain that there was dan
|. ger Of the loss of traffic worth nearly
: a million dollars a year to the AtchisoI
: system; that in order to protect it al
a understanding was entered into between
the railroad company and the fuel com
: pany was to supply the coal at $l.l5
/. the company was to haul the coal TO-
1920; the people to whom 1t wa
! shipped in Ell Paso and other south
: western points were to receive it AM
!, pay for the coal, $4.05 a ton. TIL
n tariff covering this arrangement wa
published 50 :, as az to show the he freigh
rate was not separated from the cos
8. Of the coal at the mines, as 1t shoul'
It have been. Mr.. Morton said he di
g, not. know personally how the matte
,e was being handled until the facts wer
n developed in the investigation Of tn
le case by the interstate commerce com
Of mission. His own connection with tn
matter was to see that the traffic wa
70 secured to the Atchison rails, and afte
ut | GnaC details were leIL TO SuDOIuIuaIes
He claims that the Colorado Fuel con
2, pany was the only shipper Of coal fro1
rs that district, 30 that no unjust discrin
ination was made against any othe
Colorado producer.
ID Morton and Injunctions.
g, The following year the injunction
q q were issued. Mr.. Morton claims thu
III it was the testimony which he CAV
i which led To tha Issue of these iniun,
I, tions. When the injunction was issue
r against the Santa Fe he gave positiy
instructions verbally and in writing
comply with its terms. These instru
lions were reiterated when the Elixir
bill became law in 1908. He admit
It however, that notwithstanding all {
rs these precautions. the Old arrangemell
osl sc billing coal at q delivered price an
not separating the freight rate was n,