The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-11-10
THE HARTMAN CASES.

Word comes from the East that the
suits instituted in the Federal Courts
against Mr.. Hartman on account of the
allcgcd railway mergers, and the like.
viii probably be dropped, The fact Is
that those suits were so intangible, so
surrounded by political atmosphere, and
they owed their origin SO much TO
the personal hostility of Mr.. Roosevelt
10 Mr., Hartman, that since this per
sonal hostility no longer counts, The
feeling seems 10 be very fairly justified
that the eases Will not bc pushed any
further, now that MIR. Hartman is dead.
| With regard 10 one of the counts in
those suits. ms The Tribune pointed out
long ago, there is no substance TO If: We
mean the charge of merger between
the Union Pacific and the Southern Pa
cifc IN the line from Omaha to San
| Francisco. The idea that n merger
should bc claimed between the South
crn Pacific and the Union Pacific. so far
| as this transcoutincntal linc is con
ccrned i'm the sense of tho Northern Sc
curiticS case, is a complete mlsht.
! The Northern Securities case dealt with
the securities of the Northern Pacific
and the Great Northern railways,
which were merged i'm that great Sc
curity pool, as IL might be called.
| These roads can be taken TO be COM
petitivc through their whole length,
Each starts in the vicinity of 81. Paul
and Duluth, aud trayorscs the conh-
ncnt 10 the Pacific coast. They are
parallel lines, and IL parallel lines can
ever be competitive, these certainly
were so, and the government won ITS
case accordingly; but in respect to the
Union Pacific and Southern Pacific no.
such condition exists. They arc in no
seuSe competitive. They do not traverse
the same region, and so far from being
parallel lines, they are merely compile
mentary lines. One ends where the other
begins, and il takes both TO make the
one transcontinental line. In no sense
are they in the Northern Securities
class. In no sense do they serve the
same regions. They arc merely joined
together to make ono through line, each
conducting It's own local traffic in Its
own way. quite independent from tho
other, They do not reach the same
points at all, except only at Ogden,
The situation, as respects these, there
fore, is totally different from the
Northern Securities case. and cannot be
prosecuted on the same basis. In fact,
VIC do not see how they can be prose-
cuted at all on any basis that would
treat Of them as competitive lines. AS
TO the Que point which they have in
common, aud where they meet, it would
be ridiculous to think that they com
pete for the Ogden business, one bring
ling in freight from the west and the
other from the east on a competitive
basis.
1t has been assumed by some news.
papers that because the cases against
Hartman are likely TO be dropped,
therefore what is called the Salt Lake
case, recently heard here in tho rccep'
tion of testimony and afterward in
argument, is also likely TO fail. We
point out. however, that this case has
nothing TO do with the Government S
proceedings against Hartman, The
cases against Hartman were brought
on long before the Salt Lake case
took form, and the two procedures bear
mo relation whatever to each other. The
government case against Mr.. Hartman
was designed, if successful, to break
the Hartman system into a number of
fragments, each to be operated indie
pepdeptly. The Salt Lake case simply
relates to freight rates and unjust
discrimination therein. 1t holds that
lSalt Lake City is badly Disseminated
against. and that the shippers here are
entitled TO relief 1t is easily seen
therefore, that the two procedures have
nothing whatever in common. They
are not even before the same tribunal
the Hartman cases being in the
Federal courts, and the Salt Lake case
as 10 freigbts being before the In
terstatc Commerce Commission IT i.
true that the Salt Lake case might
perhaps land in the Federal courts later
, on. especially if the railroads arc not
satisfied with the decision which Tho
| Interstate Commerce Commission is &c
render.
1t is TO be noted, further that thu
Salt Lake case is not directed against
| The Hartman roads any more than it Il
| against the other roads that are factor.
5 in transporting frcights TO Salt Lake
, and this, also, is d very important diff
ference, Tho cases against Hartman
: were specific against him and agaips
his railway combinations. The Salt Lake
= case has nothing to do with railway
T combinations in that sense; it simply re
c latos TO transportation CHARGES and dis
+ examinations, and is directed agains
0 all the roads that arc engaged in tn,
/ transportation of freights from the cas-
n or the west TO this city. An'
b so VIC do not understand how
4 lit is that some of our con
= tempornrics have blupdered into the I'm
= eenablc position that because the Har
b rimau cases are likely TO be dropped
a. ~ coIt oL. NJ ls, ba Jc,,.,,.o 4