Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-05-05
(Signed)
Contract Specifically Cancelled.

The agreement referred to by Mr.. Iovett
provides that for good consideration to
each by the other paid, the recent whereof
Is hereoy acknowledged. it is covenanted
ana agreed, by and between the parties
hereto, that said agreement between the
parties hereto; of date June 10, 1903, and
each and every part thereof be, and the
same is, hereby cancelled, abrogated and
annulied, so that no part of the same shall
hereafter be of any binding force or valid
ity as between the parties hereto, or other
WISE
It will be recalled that part of the COM
MISSIONS inquiry into the operations of the
Hartman lines, including the Southern
racine Company, was conducted at Los
Angeles, Cal In that inquiry, ]. Ross Clark,
an omcial of the San Pedro line and
brother Of former United States Senator
w. A. Clark, president of the San Pedro
road, admitted. on the stand, that he under
stood, when the traffic agreement was made
between his road and the Southern Pacific
that for ninety-nine years on the class of
traffic mentioned in the agreement the San
Pedro officials could not make a change of
rate without the consent of the Southern
Pacific. Mr.. Clark further said that that
provision was not put into the agreement
at the instance of his line. The examina-
ton then continued:
Commissioner Lane-why did you con-
sent to the making Of contract with that
provision in?
How Clark's Road Secured Privileges.
Mr.. Clark-Why, that let US into south
ern California. There is a provision in
there that they can interchange business
with us on the same terms as they inter-
change with the Santa Fe Company. Now,
at that time we had probably little over
100 miles of railroad in southern California,
and that would give us access by inter-
change to 800 additional miles already con-
structed by the Southern Pacific in opera
ton.
Commissioner Lane.You say that let's
you into southern California. Could you
not have gotten in without that?
Mr.. Clark: 'In time, yes, sir, at an enor-
nous expense. Those lines were already
constructed and in operation"
In response to further inquiries, Mr.. Clark
said the contract applied only to local
fornia and laid down within the state.
When his attention was called to
clause Of the contract which provided that
no charge should be made in the rates I'M
some requirement Of state or national law,
and he was asked by Attorney Severance,
for the commission, II that did not show
clearly that 1t was never the intention
local in the state Of California, Mr.. Clark,
after some urging, said he would not un-
dertake to answer that question. Mr.. Clark
admitted further that ne was unable 70
provision In the contract. He could not
say that the provision had been drafted by
Mr. Hartman or Mr.. Harriman's asso-
GATES but ne was quite positive that 1t was
not drawn by the San Pedro road ofdcials.
Agreed Not to Construct Competing
Road.
1t developed from the trahac agreement
and from further examination Of Mr.. Clark
that the San Pedro Company had agreed
not to construct, during the life Of the con-
tract, additions to its main line or branch
lines that would be In competition with
the Oregon Short Line, "northward OF the
parallel of Salt Lake City, Utah"
What effect the abrogatton Of the agree
ment will have on the pending investigation
into the Hartman lines is yet problem
atical, but the announcement Of the cancel
lation of the agreement is received by the
interstate commerce commission with great
qualification