Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1910-06-10
WILL NOT PUSH PLAN TO LEGAL
izE TRAFFIC AGREE.
MENrs.
MANAGERS ARE FRIGHTENED
OVER RECENT INJUNCTION
Convinced That Government Had
Strongest Kind Of Case and That
Public Sentiment is Against Them
New Railroad Measure to Be Put
to a Test.
Ispeclal Correspondence

LSPSS4ai
Washington, June 10 That the
question of legalizing railroad traffic
agreements is not kely to be stirred
up again in the near future is the be-
lief expressed here in well-nformed
quarters At least il is said that no
movement in this direction is likely to
emanate from sources friendly to the
railroads.
The tone of the railroad presidents
who have been here in the last few
days is that they prefer to leave the
traffic agreement question Just where
| it is. Without question, the step OF
the administration TO invoke the
Sherman law against the Western
Trunk Line Association took the rail-
roads by surprise and thoroughly
| frightened the railroad managers. For
many years, no attempt has been made
| to apply the Sherman law to such
agreements, but that 1t could be ap-
piled has been pretty clear since the
decisions Of the supreme court in the
| joint traffic and Trans Missouri cases
| Nevertheless, as the railroad managers
admit, they have gone ahead for about
| fourteen years making rates thru un-
4 OGrStanulnS WIFI edtil OlIcI. VIZ Soub So
| they say these agreements are not
amenable to the Sherman law but At
torney General Wickersh ham Is fully
convinced that the government had the
strongest kind OF a case against the
| Western Trunk Line Association and
that If the case were to be put up to
| the court the government would win.
Now Under tho Ban.
| Tho ,,;au, Of ha y.aflrOad nraSf5eNtS
as they disclosed 1t here, Is that 1t
will be better not to try to get con-
gress in the near future to legalize the
traffic agreement for the reason that
IL the effort is made again and fails.
it will emphasize the fact that traffic
agreements are now under the ban
Iof the law and at once may come a
popular demand for the enforcement OF
| the law, Congress has shown quite
clearly in the debate on the railroad
bill that IT will not permit traffic
agreements unless the law requires the
interstate commerce commission to
supervise them stringently. Tho rail-
roads are not anxious for such an ar
rangement and their disposition now
| It appears Is to let the matter drift
along, hoping the government will not
Invoke the Sherman law against them
again and trusting that eventually pub
lie opinion will not be as antagonishc
to such agreements as 1t seems to be
at present.
The understanding between the
White House and the railroad heads
whereby the increases in rates made
since May 1 are to be submitted TO the
interstate commerce commission raises
some interesting questions as to ad-
minis ering the new measure. The rail-
road bill has been ordered to confer
ence. 1t is expected 1t will be reshaped
there so that it Will be neither the
house bill nor the senate bill The SEN
ate bill allows the interstate commerce
commission to hold up rate increase
for ten months pending inquiry into II.
| The house bill restricts this time 10
four months. If the conferees take the
house provision in this respect and
limit the time to four months. 1t Will
be practically impossible for the inter
state>commerce commission to make
anything like a thorough inquiry into
the merits of the increases proposed.
The railroads will lay before the com
mission vast fabric of increases to be
passed upon This will involve an enor-
nous amount Of inquiry. 1t is scarcely
possible for the commission to go to
| the bottom OF ouch increases In four
months and 1t is doubtful II the work
| can be done In ten months, when 1t Is
| considered the commission will have a
| great deal Of other work on its hands.
That the new railroad law will COM
pei congress in the near future to con-
! slider enlargement of the interstate
commerce commission is view held
here by many. Already, the commits
sion has a heavy burden. This will be
largely added to by the new law. Some
| discussion of the need of enlargement
has been current this session but moth
| ing has come Of 1t.
Near Relative.