Los Angeles herald., 1907-01-26
ORANGE GROWERS
AGAIN DEFEATED
SHIPPING RATES REMAIN THE
SAME
Suit to Have Charges Reduced to One
Dollar Dismissed - Another
Appeal May Be
Made


Orange growers of Calif,r have
lost their suit to compel the Southern
Pacific and the Santa Fe to reduce
the rate on citrus fruit from $1.25 to
81 q hundred.
This outcome of tle contest OF the
fruit growers in behalf of lower freight
rates was known to this railroads near
ly a month ago, but the fact has just
become public and doubt is expressed
that more than a small percentage of
the fruit growers or shippers even now
are aware that the case has been de-
cided against them.
Judge Wellborn, on motion OF Dis
trict Attorney Lawler, who received
his instructions from the attorney gen.
eral I'm Washington, several weeks ago,
dismissed the suit, which was brought
by Joseph II. Call in behalf of the
fruit growers.
This is the second defeat for the
orange growers. The first was on the
complaint that the railroads had agreed
on routing and in which the United
States supreme court decided adverse
ly on the ground that no evidence had
been offered to show that there had
been a pool arrangement.
Another Suit Probable
The supreme court previously had de-
cided that the railroad commission had
no power to regulate rates, and for that
reason the rate suit was dismissed
Inasmuch as on the question of pool
arrangements now depends any hope of
relief on the par. of the fruit growers
and shippers, the belief Is expressed
by one of the leading fruit growers of
Southern California that another ap-
will hn Ia tn 40
mission.
Joseph H. Call made the following
statement yesterday:
Both the old interstate commerce
commission and the present one have
proven such shams that they are not
worthy of attention. The former rate
law and the present Hepburn act were
written for. and by the railroads. The
only charge on which we could have
won against the railroads is the pool
ing charge which the commissio. has
declared true, but which 1t has refused
to take to court. -et 1t was the first
of all the charges made.
When Investigation Began
I'm 1900 the California Fruit ex-
change asked the interstate commerce
commission to investigate these
charges: First, tha the Southern Pa
cific and Santa Fe had illegally COM
bined to pool their earnings, control
rates and divide profits on shipments
Of citrus fruits; second, that under
that combination they charged freight
rate on oranges that was excessive and
extortionate; third, that as a part of
that combination they unlawfully con-
trolled the routing of shipments of
fruit over connecting lines. A vast
amount of testimony was taken by the
commission in various parts of the
United States. April 10, 1902, the COM
mission rendered it's first decision
holding that the railroad illegally die
tated the routing, but it failed to sup
port the decision with any orIer con-
cerning the pool back of It.. The United
States supreme court last year decided
against the commission on the routing
question-and all because the commits
sion had not shown or even attempted
to show the court that the pool existed
as the basis for the routing arrange
ments. The commission simply had
made a naked charge and left it un-
supported.
Illegal Pool Responsible
February II, 1905, after taking still
more testimony, the commission made
a further finding and order that the
rate on oranges was excessive by Is
cents a hundred, and found, too, that
the illegal pooling was back of and re-
sponsible for 1t. And yet, when it
brought suit to enforce its order for
reduction in the rate the commission
still refused to make an order for dis
solving the pool. The bringing of the
suit, therefore, was absolutely ridicu-
lous, as the supreme court of the United
States had already decided a score of
times that the commission had no pow
er to fix rates, either directly or indi-
rectly. So, quite ..aturally. he govern
ment also has dismissed this suit.
'It was the duty of the commission
in the first place to have filed suit to
dissolve the railroad pool. 1t had plen-
ty of proof of pooling-more testimony
than the present commission has Sc
cured against Hartman in all it's ses-
sions. 1t was when it filed the case
to secure a reduction in rates that the
commission appointed me to prosecute,
told the commission it was practicing
deception on the public by filing an ac-
ton that it had no right to bring and
refusing to file one which it was it's
right and CITY to institute. Therefore,
1 refused to prosecute the rate case but
offered to prosecute the railroads for
pooling. Then I withdrew from the
whole affair.
Pool Is Immune
at is now nearly seven years since
lHe lnNSSll6dllOl SldIlcu. IHe COIIl-
mission did nothing decisive for five
years. 1t is now two years since 1t con-
cluded that the pool existed and that it
is the weapon with which the railroads
take away nearly half of the total value
of the citrus crop from fruit growers
each year-yet the commission has done
nothing to prosecute for pooling.
"I found, in going over the history of
the interstate commerce commission.
that no action ever brought by 1t has
been decided by the United States su-
preme court in much less than seven
years: that some have run as long as
ten years and that the commission has
never won a case During all these
long fights the railroads go ahead vio-
lating the Law nd. II 1t is an inde-
pendent dealer that the commission is
representing, he usually Ltarves to
death. The law gives the railroads the
greatest freed and ties the peoples
hands behind their b, cks."
nEAI