The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-10-31
OGDEN SAYS FAIR
RATES ARE UNFAIR
"Get a Conference and You Can
Get a Conference Rate, the
Railroads RetOrt.
Low FARES ARE DUE TO
EVENTS. NOT TO PLACES
Circumstances and Conditions
of the Two Cities Are
. Not Alike.

The Ogden passenger case occupied
The attention of the Interstate com
mcrce commission for an hour and a
half Saturday forenoon in tho Postottice
building in this city. The four com.
n,issionors, Prouty, Clements, Lane and
Clark. were on the bench. Judge f.
G. Dillard, interstate commerce attorney
for the Hartman lines, and p, l., vii.
lsms. general attorney for the Oregon
Short Line. represented the railroad in
terests, while Judge a Z. Haywood
anu Judge IL. II. Henderson looked after
stho ,nterests of Ogden
Argument lasted fortyfive minutes
on each side, The Ogden lawyers
claimed that the railroads discriminate
against their city by not allowing the
same passenger rate TO public affairs
IN that city as are allowed 10 Salt Lake
during the Mormon conference. They
argued that the two cities should bc
placed on an equal footing rs 10 all
passenger rates, so that trade wonld
como TO both alike, and that The low
money TO he spent in this city by the
outside trade fiat otherwise would 80
TO Ogden.
Conditions Not Alike
The railroads held that the condi-
llOuS NtIb bN HD dliht, VI tNtu
SIMILAR, when Salt Lake and Ogden are
compared from the standpoint Of pas
sengeT rates. They maintained that the
Mormon conference is an institution pc
'culiar to Salt Lake City alone, due to
religious conditions totally outside the
boundaries Of railroad affairs.
II Ogden had such gathering then
special rates would apply 10 Ogden and
10 no other point. Examples such as
:, bn fuSstx.ul IN punlnx ~
Portland. Ore. or the special cclebra-
fious in New Orleans, ST. Louis or Den
ver. wcro given as examples.
The special rate 10 San Francisco
when ihe fleet was there was quoted as
another example. Hence conference
rate' was TO the conference, wherever
IL might be held. regardless of cities.
il was also pointed out that if the com
mission granted Ogden 5 prayer, then
every hamlet and mining camp could
claim the same rates.
The Ogden attorneys tried 10 convince
the commission that the rate TO Salt
Lake was not so much conference rate
as a rate 10 the state fair IN this city,
as opposed to thc higher rate TO the
intermountain fair in Ogden.
a Conference Rate,
On this ground. 1t was contended, and
with practically no opposition, the two
rates would be ont of harmony; but
the railroads claimed that the Ogden
rate was for the fair, while the Salt
Lake rate was for the conference. Also
that if the state fair people had wit
enough 10 hold the fair in Salt Lake at
the time conference rates 10 Salt Lake
were in effect, that there was no reason
why such a thing should not be done, on
the sape ground that Ogden had the
same right; that is, TO hold the inter
mountain fair in this city while the
conference rates to Salt Lake exclusive.
~ weTe in effect.
in word the Ogden lawyers claimed
that the rates 10 the two cities were
due TO the local fairs IN each city. hence
tho rates should be alike: while the
railroads held that the rates to the
fairs were alike, but that Salt Lake
got conference rate because the Nor.
mon conference was held IN this city.
and that if Ogden could get a Mormon
conference, then Ogden could have a
conference rate.
The commission. took the matter uu
der consideration. No testimony was
beard Saturday. as that had been taken
by the commission the day before. The
meeting was short and largely formal.
Only few spectators were present