The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1908-03-23
CAN'T DISTURB "BALTIGPOOL"
INTERSTATE COMMISSION DIS
MISSES COMPLAINT.

n sustalns the Demurrer That II Hal No
jurisdiction ~ 10 Shipments Moving
From Our Ports 20 . Foreign Country
Not Adjacent 70 the United states,
WASHINGTON, March 27.-MerohAndise
billed from an interior point in the United
STATES 20 a point in Europe Is regarded
as all water transportation ina decision OF
the Interstate Commerce Commission just
handed down. The commission holds that
such traflo is not subject TO interstate
commerce regulations. 1t IL affirmed that
the act TO regulate commerce arose out OF
the unjust and discriminatory practices
Of the rail lines and that carriers that are
independent Of railroads are exempt from
the restrictions imposed by the interstate
commerce act and denied It's benefits.
The decision ia 10 the case Of the Cosmo-
politan Shipping Company Of New Jersey
against the IHamburg-American Packet
Company, the North German Lloyd Steam
ship Company and the Wilson iHulD lines
and the Observation-Disclosures Line, con-
stituting the so-called Baltic pool IL Ia
held that the pooling Of traffic by water
carriers lie plainly a matter over which this
commission has no jurisdiction Com
missioner Lane wrote the opinion, which is
concurred in by all the other commits
aoners. A demurrer filed on behalf OF
the companies constituting the Baltic
pool by former Senator John C.. Spooner,
william g. Choato and Harrington Putnam
OF New York is sustained.
The Cosmopolitan Shipping Company
in itsicomplaint filed on January $ alleged
that the companies named as defendants
transported traffic under through bills Of
lading between inland points Of the United
States and foreign ports. II was charged
that the defendant companies had an ar
rangement for the pooling Of eastbound
export traffic moving by rail 10 Atlantic
ports and thence by steamship lines TO
points in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Fin
land and German points on the Baltic,
and that this Baltic pool arbitrarily de-
termlned the ultimate rates from such m
land points Of the United States TO foreign
ports, and that freight shipments are ar
bitrarily manipulated 50 "a to put out Of
business the ocean freight service Of a
line not belonging to the pool.
II was also charged that the Hamburg
American Packet Company maintains a
monopoly Of ~westbound and eastbound
traffic forwarded on local and on through
bills Of lading between Germany and other
continental countries and inland cities Of
the United States.
This Baltic pool, the complaining com
many alleges, determined the ultimate
rates for forwarding merchandise on
through and on local bills Of lading from
the cities Of Chicago, 81. Louis, Kansas
City and other points in the United States
via the North Atlantic ports Of the United
States 10 European points reached by the
steamships Of the defendants and divided
such freight traffic on the basis Of the follow
ing peroentages; Hamburg-American Packet
Company, via Germany, 80 per cent North
German Lloyd, via Germany, l75 per cent ,
Wilson HulD Line, via England, 25 per
cent; Scandinavian-American Line, direct
TO Denmark, "a per cent.
To the complaint filed by the Cosmo-
politsn shipping Company the companies
named as defendants demurred on the
ground that the commission had no iuris-
dlction. The commission in sustaining
this demurrer and dismissing the ON
plant said in part:
This commission has no jurisdiction H. to
shipments moving from ports Of the nlted
States to a foreign country not adjacent
when such shipments are not carried by
rail or by rail and water from an inland
point Of origin TO a port Of transshipment
An inland movement Of export or import
tratic is a condition precedent to the attach
ing Of jurisdiction,
Tho con, nniaaion may rpgulata int erat atp
trafno, whether by rail or by a combined
rail and water route. from point Of receipt TO
point OF delivery, but the commission in its
control over foreign commerce is Limited 10
the regulation of such trafiC, whether by
railroad or BY a combination Of rail aud
water carriers, from and 10 the point Of trans
shipment. The act provides no machinery
by which It's provisions can be enforced as
30 transatlantic ST steamship lines The pool
ing Of traflc by water carriers is plainly a
matter over which this commission has no
Jurisdiction.
A rail carrier may control and connect
With q line OF steamships engaged In foreign
m with which &c may interchange
S1Allass as freely az with another rail carrier,
and II may quote a combined rate for the
through movement, the agent Of the railroad
oompany acting az the agent Of the steaT-
ship company In 90 doina.
In conclusion the opinion says;
This ruling il me only one which ia con
sistsnt with whri seems 10 be the policy Of
the law-viZ, that while restriction and con-
troll are essential az to the inland carriers Of
foreign the ocean ca rriers Of such
commerce should remain unresirained and
free. There is not to-day and never has been
such q thing as stability Of rates upon the
ocean. Perhaps il Is not desirable that there
should be. The ocean is highway free TO
all. No franchise Is needed to sail the seas
nor 10 the establishment Of 4 line Of ships
founded either In law or in economics upon
the theory Of a public serving monopoly
which underlies the relation Of the railroad
TO the State. It may well he therefore that
without regulation and by reason Of natural
com etitiVe conditions the public will be best
served and In the end treated more e1uitably
by leaving the water carrier Ia foreign lands
entirely unhampered By legal restrictions
such as the people Of this and other lands have
found It necessary TO impose upon the rail
roads.