Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-07-18
CHOLERA PERIL LESS Plan BIG PAGEANT ACCOS
Fear AIayed by Vigorous Mr. Macaands Suggestion Humboldt
cautionay Measures. for July Next. charg
yAuD $. COOPERATE DISCUSSED AT MEETING BEFORE
Former Will Detail Surgeons Gggenhe
sbins Coming Here Up
ORDERS TEN DAY QUARANTINE
O.
of eeieoaoon
Humboldt Company Lawyer
Charges Discrimination.
BEFORE HOUSE Committee
Guggenheim Alaska Railroad Said to
Have Annulled Agreement.
COMPLAINT MADE OF RATES
Witnesses for the Steamship Com
pany Are Declared to Have
Been Coerced.

Determination by the Alaska syndi-
cate against the Humboldt Steamship
Company Of Seattle was charged by
Charles D. Drayton. counsel for the COM
pany, before the House committee on
expenditures in the Interior Department
today.
That the White Pass and Yukon rail-
road. controlled by the Guggenheim in
terests. annulled an agreement with his
company at the behest of syndicate
steamship companies and involved the
Humboldt company in hardships Of
operaships of operation was the SUBJ
stance Of Mr.. Drayton's testimony.
Excessive wharfage charges and ex-
cessive railway rates from Skagway to
points in the interior were assessed
against the Humboldt company, while Pa
cidc Coast and Alaska Steamship Com
pany lines enjoyed advantages at the
hands of the syndicate, the witness de-
clared
charge demanded by the Yukon company
or is the company a law unto itself?'
asked Chairman Graham.
Doubtful of Authority.
tary of the Interior has for some time
been doubtful of his authority to
modify rates in Alaska"
80 doubtful that he wouldn't at
tempt it?'
mo attempt has been made re-
Gently"
The witness declared that the Alaska
syndicate had coerced witnesses for
ceedings, and that witnesses had frank
ly told them they were afraid to speak
on behalf of the Humboldt company
because they would get no business
from the syndicate If they did.
IF the humboldt company was upt
would the syndicate lines have any
opposition?"
Il think not
Could Do Good Business.
IF the interstate commerce commits
sion is wrong and you can get a
through route from Seattle to the in
terror could you then do a profitable
business in Alaskan"
'Unquestionably."
Mr.. Drayton's company operates be-
tween Seattle and Skagway. Alaska,
and his testimony was in connection
with the committees inquiry into Con-
troller bay land matters. involving al
legged attempted monopoly of Alaska
coal fields.
Relief Was Refused.
Mr.. Drayton said the Humboldt, Pacific
Coast and Alaska Steamship Companies
for several years had operating agree
ments with the White Pass and Yukon
railway to transfer freight and passen-
gers to interior Alaska, but the Pacific
Coast and Alaska Companies, deciding
they were giving up business to the
Humboldt concern, forced the White Pass
line to annul its Humboldt agreement.
The interstate commerce commission re-
fused relief on the ground it had no au-
thority in Alaska, mandamus litigation
began and the case is on appeal before
the Supreme Court of the United States.
MIR. Drayton added that the Copper River
Railway Company intervened in the
case before the commission.
Who controls those railroads." Chair
man Graham asked.
Controlled by Guggenheims.
Il have always understood that both of
them are controlled by the Guggen-
helms"
The witness added that recently a COM
promise with the Yukon company was
possible. but the rival steamship would
not consent to it.
The other steamship companies blocked
the settlement asked Chairman Gra-
ham.
THE Alaska Steamship Company. con-
trolled by the Guggenheims. stood out
against 1t. The Pacific Coast Company.
/ think, would have agreed"