Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1908-05-29
Fight It Out In Courts.

Senator Aldrich and the Republican steer
Ing committee Of the Senate have decided
that nothing but "must" legislation will be
put through the Senate. Thus the Elkins
resolution to suspend the commodity clause
OF the Rate law will go over until the next
session Of Congress. This throws upon At.
torney General Bonaparte and the Admin.
stration the duty of enforcing that law.
Railroad men and Administration officials
hoped that Congress would declare its atti-
tude toward the commodity clause by some
form of legislation. The railroads cared
very little whether the Foraker resolution
or the Elkins proposition was adopted, 80
long as Congress took "back step" from its
advanced position OF two years ago respect
ing railroad rate legislation. The decisive
vote by which the Foraker substitute was
defeated on Friday, followed by the decision
not to act upon the Elkins resolution at this
time, is strongly indicative OF the temper of
Congress toward tho repeal of the commod.
ity clause.
number OF men in both houses would
be glad to see the commodity clause repeal
ed, but they lack the courage of their con-
VlctlOns. They believe that mistake was
made in trying to ALLEVIATE the railroads with.
In short space of time from their collateral
Industrial properties, but are unwilling to
alter the law at the present time. They are
aware that sentiment was strong TWO years
ago in favor of divorcing the transportation
business from the coal mining business, and
do not want to take the chance OF defeating
the purpose of the commodity clause upon
the eve Of the national and Congressional
elections.
Senator Elkins was very anxious to sc.
cure legislation suspending the commodity
clause until January, 1910, but the Senate
was against him.
Before attempting to enforce the law gen.
orally the Attorney. General and the Presi-
dent have decided TO institute q test case.
This case will be instituted 10 Philadel.
phia, because that city Is the terminal of the
great coal carrying roads.
Able railroad attorneys hold that the COM
modify clause is unconstitutional. They
maintain that its effect will be to deprive
them Of properties without due process Of
law, and they are willing TO fight the IN at
ter out in the courts. So far as can be as
certalned the railroads own coal, steel and
industrial properties valued at something
like $3.50, 100000, and they will resist to the
utmost the clause which would deprive
them OF the full SO of these valuable pro-
perties.
The commodity clause does not require
the railroads to sell their coal mines. II
simply forbids them to haul In interstate
commerce the products OF these mines or
of other Industrial properties owned by
them.
The roads against which the suit is to be
filed by the Attorney General in June are
the Reading, the Central OF New Jersey,
the Baltimore and Ohio, the Delaware,
Lackawanna and Western,th Pennsylvania,
the Erie and the Lehigh Valley. II Is con.
tended that all of the points but one that
have been raised can be squarely decided
upon test cases against these roads, and this
remaining point can be raised by suit in
Iowa against the Rock Island road, which
holds stocks and bonds in coal mining com.
panies valued at about $5,000000.
The Baltimore and Ohio until recently
held stocks and bonds of industrials falling
within the scope Of the commodity clause
worth about 1914, 15O37, but 1t is under
stood to have disposed Of the bulk of this
property. But certain Senators think the
manner in which the Baltimore and Ohio
disposed OF these properties ought to be
passed upon by the courts.
II the Supreme Court holds the commod-
ity clause unconstitutional there will DO no
necessity of prosecutions. But II the law
Is held to be constitutional there will un-
doubleday be bitter struggle in Congress
some time over tho application of the law,
because If II is held to be constitutional and
the railroads must sell these properties they
will have to be sold at great sacrifice.