Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1906-07-27
WARM GRAIN RATES
Continued from First Page.)

Continued from First Page.)
organizations and acting IN entire harmony
In pursuing his investigations Mr.. Cover
called on me this morning and, with Mr..
Utts assistance, we went over the whole
basis of the controversy. Boiled down, the
position of the Rock Island with regard to
the elevation allowance discrimination is
told clearly nv Mr. Gover in his nublio
statement OF yesterday. In reply to that
want to say that the business public of
Omaha is not concerned with Inc motives
of the Rock Island officials nor with their
reasons for any action they may take but
solely with the effect that action has upon
our interests.
We have no objection to the Rock Island
making an unloading allowance at Kansas
City. Our objection arises from the fact
that 1t is withheld at Omaha. There is no
legal complication in the way of making
that allowance a. Omaha. On the con-
trary, our lawyers advise us that the foil
ure TO make II is absolutely illegal, being
gross discrimination against Omaha.
The reduction of rates to which Mr.
Cover refers in his statement has nothing
whatever to do with the controversy, such
reduction having been made from Omaha
to the east. Kansas City has the same re-
ductton and the unloading allowance also.
We want to be fair with the Rock Island
road and with all roads that serve this
market No other policy will avail us in
standard of fairness that compels us to
submit to severe injury based upon an
uncertain and vague promise that Il would
result ultimately to our good. We want
the ultimate good, of course, and we are
willing to give the Rock Island people
credit for good faith in promising II. In
the meantime our situa ton with regard to
Kansas City may be likened TO that of two
men badly injured in railroad wreck.
be completely cured. One is taken to a
hospital, safeguarded in every way, given
every attention his condition needs the
other Is left lying out in the cold to take
I care OF himself, If he can. He may re-
! cover, but. whether he does or not, ne may
friendly on account Of the neglect, The
Omaha market Will undoubtedly weather
all the present railroad storms, but 1t will
feel friendly only to those railroads that
extended 1t necessary succor during those
storms,
Mr., Cover could offer no relief from the
effect OF the Memphis equalization, but
made light OF that effect, claiming, that
| little business was moving. 1 assured him
! that we were contendnR, in that case,
against the recognition Of dangerous
principle, which would constitute an in
furious precedent, He objected to holding
, the Rock Island for the sins of the Frisco.
l told him that we were not lawyers and
refused to recognize the separate entity OF
two properties which were so closely re-
trolled the policies of both. In other words
We must reach the Frisco through the Rock
Island.
TO sum up, the situation remains exactly
the same as when Mr.. Cover came, except
that am glad he knows, of his own knowl,
edge, that his road is facing a thoroughly
united and hostile sentiment in Omaha and
| that that sentiment can only be dispelleo
by the removal of the discriminat ton that
This is the text of the Interstate Com.
merce commissions finding at the former
hearing Of the case:
Union Pacific Elevator Allowance
The Union Pacific entered into contract.
with Peavey & Co., under which the latter
erected grain elevators at Council BlunS
and Kansas City for the transfer OF grair
| at those terminals OF the Union Pacific sys.
! TEN and for the service OF Transferring
grain by elevator at said points the UnioT
| Pacific agreed TO pay Peavey & Co. ~
! cents per hundred. Corporations controlled
I by Peavey a Co. were formed to conduct
large buyers and shippers OF grain in the
| northern and western grain PRODUCING
states and control large number Of coun.
| try elevators In making this arrangement
! the Union Pacific acted in good faith anC
1 the facts indicate that IL cents per 10
! pounds Is not excessive charge for the serY.
, The real compliments in the proceeding
are carriers competing with the Union Pa.
! cihc who claim that II this arrangement
/ is not declared illegal they will be COM
/ PEELED to make similar allowances at trans
| fer points on their lines, and no shipper moi
| dealer I'm competition with Peavey q 90
1 has appeared TO protest nor complain II
' Held;
First-That the compensation paid for ele
yator or transfer service Is not unreasona
! BILE.
| Second-That the Union Pacific is entitled
| to perform the work itself or hire Il don,
| by others and is not legally at fault oil
| guilty Of wrong doing, because incidentally
J those employed by the carrier to transfer
! the grain are aided more OF less in another
! line OF business in which they are engaged
| Third-That any injury or detrtment re
| sulting to rival carriers under the arrange
| ment Is something which the law does no
seek to prevent.
The conclusions reached by the Interstat L
I Commerce commission In it's decision states
| However objectionable the arrangement II
| question may appear from any point o.
| view, we are convinced, rather against ou
! original impressions, that It cannot be ad
| judged unlawful. We have found thes
contracts were made in good faith and 70
| a legitimate purpose. The parties Wer'
| competent TO contract; the thing done 4
| proper and necessary to protect the inter
ests OF the carrier; the consideration is no
| excessive and the honesty OF the tTansac
| ton is unimpeached
| Regarding the assertion that the actor
| OF the Union Pacific viii compel other car
Tiers to make similar allowances at othe
\ points the commission says: This appTe
| hension on their part may be well founded
but how does that alter OF AFFECT the lega
, rights Of the respondent? The law impose
no duty on the Union Pacific 10 Safeguard
the business Of its competitors or the ship
pers they serve. The commission holds ais
| that the effect OF the arrangement is M
| more a violation Of the Law than would b,
| a reduction of the rate.