The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1906-03-09

Washington, March THAT there is
still sharp difference of opinion
between the supposed friends of
the DolliverHepb railroad rate
bill was made decidedly manifest to-
day in the senate chamber. The di-
vision is over the question whether a
rate made by the interstate commerce
commission shall be suspended by the
courts pending final adjudication, and
was brought to the surface in brief
devate which followed a set speech by
Mr.. Clapp in support Of the bill. In
reply to a question by Mr.. Tillman,
Mr.. Clapp expressed doubt as to the
power so to legislate as to enforce the
penalties proposed by the bill pending
review of any given finding by the
courts. Mr.. Tfllman and Mr.. Bailey
took sharp issue with this statement.
The former expressed the opinion that
the issue is a violation and declared
that If an order of the commission is
not to be maintained until gen
judicial settlement in case is reached
it will be necessary to reform the
courts. Mr. Bailey also cOntended
that congress can so legislate as to
maintain rates until the final order of
the court is issued, and to prevent in
terlocutory order suspending such
rates.
During the day there were two
speeches On the rate bill, the one by
Mr.. Clapp in support of it, and an
other by Mr.. Scott, practically in op-
position
The remainder of the day was de-
voted to the statehood bill and Messrs.
Perkins and SpOOner spoke in Opposi-
tino to that bill as it stands. Mr..
Scott's argument was directed mainly
against the principle of the govern
ment ownership of railroads In which
he included the control Of rates by the
government He admitted that there
are evils connected with the railroad
system of the country, but said he
would not vote for the pending rail-
road rate bill without a provision for
ample court review.
Mr.. Clapp spoke in general support
of the rate bill as reported from the
committee on interstate commerce. He
upheld the right of congress to hX
rates, either directly or through
commission and defended the omission
from the bill of provision for judicial
review of rates. Mr.. Tillman asked
Mr.. Clapp if he interpreted the bill to
mean that any circuit judge or district
Judge, upon complaint, could suspend
the order of the commission until the
litigation was completed and Mr..
Clapp replied mo, not in a thousand
years" He added that what he had
said was that Where the court sus-
pended this order pendent Lite, it only
operates as the expression of the pur-
pose Of the court, but in view of the
language of the provision: UNLESS the
same shall be suspended" also operat-
ed as the purpose and will of the leg
islature as to it's not being in fact yet
SUSPENDED. and, consequently, the car
rier obtaining this temporary restrain
ing order would not be amenable for
the penalty of $1,000 day in the
meantime if the restraining order was
finally vacated.
This statement of the Minnesota
senator's position had the effect of
elicdtine the following from the South
Carolinian:
off he said 1.-The penalty Of $1,000
day is suspended by an order Of the
court pending the litigation. where is
your punishment to compel the carrier
to ever obey an order? Is not the
whole case given away if the senator
contention as to the Interpretation OF
these words is right? Are we not face
to face with an absolute surrender or
the relief to the shipper"
Mr.. Clapp responded: Il think we are
face to face with the statement MADE
from which read, and [ cannot place
It any better than it was placed by
the senator from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Knox when he said: ''Of course, 7
do not mean that in an independent
proceeding begun in the court the
court could not, in the exercise of its
discretionary powers, when satisfied
that the rate fixed by the commission
was unlawful. enjoin its operation ui-