The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-06-17
Patterson Attacks the Methods of Capital
LAKE ERIE-OHIO RIVER CANAL
Sees Scheme of Millionaires to De-
 fraud the People.
Mr. Knox Comes to the Rescue of the Promoters and Says Project h Intended to Break the Rail-
 road Monopoly.

washington, June 16.--Senator Pat terson today found in the bill incorpo- rating the Lake Erie and Ohio River ship canal. an encouragement for the advocates of ownership of the public utilities. He spoke on the measure soon after the Senate convened and quoted a pamphlet issued by the com pany as giving an explanation for ask ing a congressional charter the fact that the government might ultimate ly become the owner of the proposed canal
 MT. Patterson did not. however, re- gard this as the real reason for com ing to Congress for charter. He found on the contrary that there was e financial reason for the move They were preparing to go wild eating Tn the United States steel corporation, the Pittsburg men said to be behind the company would not enter 1t without prospect of securing less than to l.
 This statement aroused Senator Knox who said that the Pittsburg people had not been responsible for the steel com pany,s sale. q understood that the idea was conceived by eminent finan- ciers of New York" he said, and the people of Pittsburg were not foolish enough to take less than they could get"
 MT. Patterson contended, however. that s4he mi1lionaires of Pittsburg had been particeps criminis with those Of New York in the origination of the United States Steel conspiracy
 He expressed the opinion that steel companies were behind the enterprise. :. that their object was to secure iron ore cheaper than before and by means of the tariff keep prices up and main tain their monopoly
 Patterson Eavors Amendment.
 MT. Patterson advocated an amend rnent to the bill that would forbid the sale of the canal stock for less than par and MT. Knox said in reply that while he had had a great deal to do with corporations. he had never known any except wildcat Colorado mining schemes'' whose stock was sold for less than par. MT Patterson admitted that there was some. wildcat mining schemes and that there was wiid- cat canal--far less exeusaeie because its profits would be extorted from the rockets of the people at large. He thought the canal should be under the supervision of the Interstate Commerce. Commission.
 MT. Nelson defended the bill against the charge that it was "a mere stock 1obbing scheme and, contendtng for the legitimacy of the legislation, said it was just as proper for the govern nent to charter a canal as 1t was for l. to charter a bank.
 During the Minnesota Senator's speech, Senators Patterson and Knox engaged in a heated discussion in which the former said:
 If the Senator from Pennsylvania can see no difference between Con kress granting charter for canals uniting the oceans and ship canal such as Is proposed here. then further argument Is of no avail"
 Mir Knox said he could see diff ference and that difference in favor of the canal connecting the Ohio river and Lake Erie, which is intended to cheapen freight rates and break rail- road monopoly. He said the arguments that had been made by senators against the bill had not been based upon any thing but innuendo and assumption.
 MT Patterson protested against this statement, charging that the language of Senator Knox sounded almost alike epithets," and suggested that the sem ator devote his speech to meeting ar gument rather than to impugning the motives of senators opposed to the bill
 Disnvowal By Knox.
 Disavowing any intention to "impugn the motives" of anyone, Mir Knox said he was amazed at the construction that had been placed upon his speech. but he repeated that the arguments had been absed upon assumption and that by innuendoes the character of the cap- ital involved in the proposed canal had been attacked.
 MT. Knox said he know most of the men interested in the Lake Erie canal project and that these men were not subeJct to the charge that they were 'millionaires." He said he know noth- ing about the intentions of the pro- motors except that which he saw in the prospectus of the company.
 He was taken to task by Mir Patter- son for his ignorance on the subject and replied: T owe no duty to the Senate or the Senator from Colorado in regard to this bill. I am not a. member of the cimmittee on commerce, which considered 1t, but assume that the purpose of the promoters of this canal were sufficiently inquired into properly to safeguard the interest of the government" MT. LaFollette said he objected to the inference that be- cause he opposed the bill as it came from the Senate, he was opposed to reduce tariff charges. He said wiscon- sin was as greatly interested as Mlnne- sota in this bill and in cheaper trans portation Speaking of the provision in the bill which seemed to place no l,mitaton upon the capitalization of this company, he asked Senators with a sweep of the hand that took in the en- tire chamber: Do you believe trans portation companies should be permit ted to be overcapitalizer?"
 Not waiting for an answer, he said dramattcally If my colleagues on the Republican side of this Senate cannot be made to answer that question, 1t will be answered by the American po- pie and the answer b based on sound economic principles The time has gone by when the transportation com panies can overcapitalize with impuni- ty."
 Rins Passeh by the Senate.