The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-02-18

ney for the Minnesota Shippers and Re
ceiverS association, were first called
upon to prove the charge that certain
favored companies were not required to
pay demurrage. .'S
Mr.. LOTUS said that the association
had information that at South st. Paul
Swift & Co. had not paid any demur.
shippers association made complaint
Of discrimination Since then it had
paid several demurrage charges. The
complaint was based on the statement
Of A. L. Scott, manager of the Car
Service association. .S@ss-,. -.
w. R. Ingram denied this emphati-
! cally as the association manager at
South st. Paul. He referred, to Mr..
Scott to substantiate the denial. Mr..
Scott said: -. : t.zss
81 can't understand why Swift &
Co. have been cited in this connection
as they have always paid the. charoes,
which is more, than I can say Of
Others *li=E = s.-:ss>>-1v%
s " Will you give us the names7" asked
Mr.. Washburn. -, z@@
"Not unless I am sworn. "
MIR. Scott was sworn, but Mr.. Wash
burn failed to ascertain that any de-
murrage had been RENTED unless there
had been some negligence on the part of
the railroads. :%: 5
The inquiry in this direction came to
an abrupt close as the shippers as
ISOLATION had no further proof to offer.
Transit Privileges.
Mr.. LOTUS then called attention to
grain charges over the Northern Pacific
from the, twin cities to Ashland. The
charge he made was that sRoderick
Smith or other persons with cOnven-
IL lro off %ho l.
intermediate points, clean it, sack it and
re-ship. to Ashland at rate much lower
than the thru rate Of 10 cents,
Mr.. Smith and Mr.. Still declared that
there was no discrimination, as anyone
between the twin cities and Lake Su.
perior could take advantage Of the rate
! want to know why it is not a dis.
crlmlnat1on to quote a rate of 10 cents
when the grain can be taken off a. sta.
t1on, cleaned and sacked and reshipped
to the same point for four cents lessg''
asked MT: LOTUS. !" All shippers have
not facilities for cleaning and storine
grain between here and Duluth.''
| 81 don It believe that any one eve,
shipped a carload of i grain over the
Northern Pacific at 10 cents when thew
could get a Scent rate over the Omaha
re would be foolish to do so, ''sdeclared
| Mr. LOTUS replied:
This is. the only case I know Of
where transit privilege is accorded at 8
lower rate than the thru rate. Ordin
arily atransit privilege costs cent OF
two more than the thru rate, I CAM
but feel this is a. clear case of discrim
ination.,'
! Against whom?' asked Mr.. Still.
| 1.-The shippers of the twin cities''
| But they can use the Omaha road. ,
Not unless they are able to buy
their grain west Of Minneapolis and OBJ
tain the thru rate. Dealers are not al
ways able to do that.'
An effort was made to show that Mr.
Smith received practically a 2h -cen1
rate on grain from Minneapolis, where
as the tariff rate was cents P. H
Double of st. Paul, a witness in this
matter, failed to appear, and the charge
fell fiat.
Mr.. Smith denied positively that he
had ever Informed anyone that he ha6
ever received 2h-cent rate from the
twin cities to Carlton, when the pub
lished rate was cents. He offered fur
thermore to mail to the committee hiE
freight bills to prove his statements.
The railway officials had little ad
vantage over LOTUS and made the most
of it by demanding that the investigat
ing committee should not bother ther
with frivolous, trivial charges unsup
|ported by reliable evidence. The meet
ing adjourned subject to the call of the
ichairman