Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-06-26
RAILWAY RATE BILL
Conference Report Discussed
in the Senate.
THE PIPE LINE PROVISION
Objected to by Mr.. Bailey and
Others.
MIR. FORAKER'S CONTENTION
No Analogy Between a Railroad and
Pipe Line-Anti-Pass
Amendment.
iL al

railroad. otherwise the railroads themselves
might be relieved from the operation of the
law.
Senator Lodge agreed that the purpose
of the change from common carriers" to
railroads had been to let out the Stand
ard Oil Company SO that 1t could continue
to both produce and transport OIL" Under
the amendments of the Senate he believed
that the pipe lines could be compelled to
carry the product of the Independent com
panies. He could see no reason for the
change because he believed that transporta-
ton companies should confine their efforts
to the carrying business. He believed that
all of the agitation in the supposed inter-
est Of the independent companies had been
tnstigated by the Standard company.
Nullify Pipe Line Provision.
Senator Bailey took the position that the
| change made by the conference committee
in the commodity provision would nunry the
| pipe line provision 1t was equivalent to
| making the Standard Oil Company the one
| exception to the requirement that producers
| shall not transport their own articles He
| did not charge the Standard company with
| a direct effort to influence legislation, but
| to the frightened Independent companies,
| who, 1t had transpired, sell their oil to the
Standard.
| If" he said, the Standard company
| wishes to be producer, a transporter a
| refiner. let 1t engage in either of those lines
| of effort, but don't let 1t monopolize all
| those branches of the oil industry. He
| thought the independent companies should
embrace the opportunity to free themselves.
Why should oil be preferred over coal or
any other commodity? He also referred to
the fact that lumber had been relieved Of
the commodity requirement, saying that 1t
was unfortunate in view of the fact that
our forests are rapidly vanishing. With
thaS W.
commodities whose producers cannot carry
them. This. he thought, makes the legisia-
ton Of little avail.
Mr.. Bailey also took exception to the pass
agreement. He said that as 1t reads 1t
legalzes and authorizes the giving or
passes which is discrimination that could
not be practiced. He did not therefore be-
lieve in combining the pass prohibition to
officials. nor did he believe that under the
terms of the act the penalty clause against
pass giving or pass taking could be in
forced.
We'll do our part we'll II we take care
of the federal officials: let's let the states
take care Of their own and the municipal
and county officers he said In the course
of an argument intended to show that the
csnferees had unduly extended their au-
thority in making the prohibition apply to
others than persons engaged in the natlonal
service. He made the assertion that II
should be easy to frame an effective anti
pass provision. which had the effect of
bringing Senate Tillman to his feet.
I'VE had the best possible provision In the
first conference agreement" he said, but
nobody ever heard such hurrah or stam-
pede as there was over it-of such an ex-
hibition of oratory something that passed
for it,
Mr.. Foraker's Contention.
Senator Foraker contended that there Is
no proper analogy between a railroad and
pipe line. AS a rule. he said. pipe lines are
nos built with the purpose of doing car
rying business for hire which is not the
case with railroads. He believed that to
retain the commodity provision as it passed.
the House would be to confiscate the prop
erty and that therefore 1t would not have
been sustained by the courts hence he was
going to saw that he thought the conferees
had acted wisely ut the risk of being brand
ed in the estimation of Mr.. Tillman by the
Standard Oil Company.
The Ohio senator called attention to the
fact that carriers by water are not regu-
lated by the bill. which. he said, does away
with the argument that the bill should be
made applicable to all modes OF transporta-
ton.
Senator Nelson thought the report ought
to be rejected because of the discriminatory
character OF the anti-pass provision.
Senator Culiom, one Of the conferees
agreed with Mr.. Tillman that the present
report was not good as the first one, and
attributed that circumstance to the fact
that the House had accepted some of the
Senate amendments IN the second report
TO which 1t had made objections In the
first conference. He had originally stood
with Mr.. Tillman for everything calculated
to injure the Standard OIL Company, but
since then he had received many protests
from independent oil producers In his own
state. He had absolute confidence in these
representations and had therefore consent
ed to the change. He was not willing to
punish his own people merely for the pur-
pose of Furnishing the Standard on Com
pany.
Mr.. Cullom defended the anti-pass provis-
ion. but Senator Bacon contended that 1t
was In violation of the spirit of the entire
bill
Senator Galiinger called attention to the
pass exception In favor of the Post Office
Department. saying that under It passes
could be given to every one In that service,
including not only the Postmaster General
but his assistants and even every post
master and every letter carrier In the
country.
Senator Lodge could see no Justice In
making an exception of pipe lines as COM
mon carriers. He also objected to the anti
pass provision excepting persons engaged
In the postal service, and Mr.. TiIman re-
piled TO the latter point by saying that the
intention had been to relieve railway pos
tai clerks of the necessity OF paying for
transportation. which would cost the gov
eminent not less than $4,000 600 annually.
Mr.. Lodge also found fault with the pass
provision on the ground OF discrimination.
1T actually authorizes and invites a
a valuable rebate In favor of favored
shipper: it strikes at the central principle
OF the bill 1t endangers some OF the most
important provisions OF the bill" He said
that while passes are prohibited to public
officials. there is nothing to prevent the
railroad companies giving passes to dele
gates to political conventions.
Senator Clapp expressed the opinion that
the pass amendment as reported Is an alb
so'Gte repeal of parts OF the Culiom law
Senator Spooner's Criticism.
The postal service exception was also
criticised by Senator spoener, who said
that 1t is indefensible because of its
breadth. Speaking Of another portion of
| the amendment. he said 1t puts IL In the
| power OF the railroads TO substitute passes
| for rebates and throws the doors wide omen
| fos that sort of discrimination, He also
expressed the opinion that 1t leaves a SEN
| ator or member of the House as free to
accept pass as before as they are not
| officers of the United States
| What. then. are they" demanded Mr.
Tillman-''n ondescripts2 and added: ..Au
| we can say. we were trying powerful hard
I a kesr senators and naynhers a,.& ~