The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-04-24
AGREEMENT TO. !. !. !.
DIVIDE TRADE
Continued from First Pass.1

I .
I Continued from First Pasel
1 49, ). 49,
pearcd to Impress tho members OF tbs
commission. & M
The witness was good one, replying
TO ali questions IN apparently the frank-
est manner. President Johnsotl,. !, Of the
! Norfolk and Western, and General Soil
| citor Dornn, Of the same road. were pro-
sent as spectators.
| William A. Glasgow. sJr,, who IS con.
! Quoting the investigation tor the gov.
! eminent was as aggressive and forcelul
al ever lie was, when as counsel for the
Norfolk and Western he used to re-
present that road IN the Virginia courts
sand before committees Of the state
Legislature. s ,s
The Hearing.
The hearing began with Mr.. Hobart on
the stand. Asked why the Norfolk aud
Western rate was higher into Norfolk
than the Chesapeake and Ohio and the
Chesapcake and Ohio higher into Rich
mont than tho Norfolk and Western, the
witness said the Norfolk and Western
had no direct line into Richmond, while
Norfolk was one Of It's local points. and
on the other hand that Richmond was q
local point on the Chesapeake and Ohio.
He thought the Norfolk and Western was
entitled to tho business into Norfolk
u
mond. Asked II there had been any un-
Outstanding between the two roads that
ono would charge a higher rate into Nor
folw and the other into Richmond; the
witness said there had been some cons
versation between officials, and did not
denylthat an arrangement had been made
to that effect. f
Replying to a question by Mr.. Glasgow,
the witness said they had not met tho
Chesapeake and Ohio rate into Rich
mond because OF revenues X His road. he
explained, could carry coal into Norfolk,
one OF ite Own points, and save the rev.
enue that would be lost by going into
Richmond, since they were obliged 70
4 pay an arbitrary rate on the lines con-
Meeting the Norfolk and Western with
Richmond. i, Il
Some Figures.
Previous to 1901 the rate into Richmond.
Mr.. Hobart stated, was $3.50 per ton;
then was raised to Sl75, and In 1903 was
raised TO s1.S5, and on April list last was
lowered to $1.60-the present tie. The 4
rate 10 I,ambert's Point, he said, for
ireshipment outside the Virginia Capes is
s1.S5 Tor 2,AO pound tons and $3.50 for
Norfolk and local harbor, points. u.
c q Rcplying to Commissioner Clement. the
witness said 1t was about April#1, 11',a
that officials OF the Norfolk and " est
crn and Chesapeake and Ohio discussed
the Norfolk and Richmond rates OF tho
4 two roads He sud the presidents and
; some traffic officials OF the two roads
were present He said the Norfolk and
Western rate to Richmond was raised at
that time and 1t was his recollection that
I the Chesapeake and Ohio rate to Nor
I folk was Increased. This relation, It was
added, was maintained until March 18th
| last.
d MIR. Hobart said he did not own any
. stock in coal companies and knew OF no
officer OF the company that owns any.
y Asked by Mr.. Glasgow as to the theory,
%upon which the rates to Norfolk and out
side the capes were made. tho witness
said tho ratio outside the capes was part
of through rate. stE.
I, Asked by Commissioner Prouty as TO
why rates were made the same by the
Norrolt and Western and the Chesa-
witness thought 1t was duo to an un-
derstanding.
I Mr.. Hobart said he understood that
Mr.. Maher. general manager OF the NOR
folk and western had been Interested
In coal prior to becoming an officer OF
tho Norfolk and Western. but that no
gave up that interest upon becoming an
officer OF tho railroad company.
Mr.. Hobart testified that General
Manager Mahcr was expressly told that
as n condition precedenttto his becoming
an officer OF the Norfolk and Western
he must dispose OF all his stockton the
Nraher Coal concern, which hoTdld.i85E
NEe added that It was the fixed policy
OF the Norfolk and Western It hat no
ofrlcer in the company can own stock IN
the collieres.
"sort Of U Understanding"
MIR. Prouty In questioning the witness
asked It there was any understanding
be tween the Norfolk and Western and
the Baltimore and Ohio. relative to the
witness said there was not, adding that
the Baltimore field was nm, unnatural
market for the Norfolk and Westerns
nut later sstd there was a Sort Of I'M I
deratandtns that the Baltimore and Ohio
should have the territory inslda1fAt the
capcs outside Of Norfolk, andthe Nor-l
ntary, oh n