The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1914-02-07
Objects to Settlement
Between That State
and Railroads.
MEANS BIG INJURY
TO OLD DOMINION
Representatives of Two States
and Railroads Concerned Are
Given Hearing by Interstate
Commerce Commission.
Matter Taken Under
Advisement.
Especial to The TImes-pispatch.

Especial to The Times Dispatchl
Washington, February 6-Thc whole
of the afternoon session of the Inter
voted to-day TO hearing arguments of
attorneys for the States of Virginia
and North Carolina, and the railroads
concerned. on the application of the
southern Railway and other carriers
for authority 10 establish lower rates
from st. Louis, the Ohio River cross
ings and Memphis and Nashville. Tenn.
to North Carolina. than the rates CON
currently applicable on like aiiic from.
to and between intermediate points
The hearing began directly after
luncheon. with all the commissioners
on the bench. 1t was announced that
one hour would be allowed to those i'm
favor of the application, and tho same
10 those opposing it.
Attorney General Beckett Of North
Carolina. opened in favor of granting,
the application. He outlined the his
tory Of the controversy, going back
ten years TO the decision of the COM
mission In the Charlotte shippers case,
in which. he declared, the commission
then stated there should be rear
lrangement of North Carolina rates
similar to that arrangement recently
erected between the State and the
railroads.
In Direct Line With Policy.
This settlement" said Mr.. Beckett,
lis in direct line with the policy out
lined by the commission itself in that
| case, in which 1t virtually declared tho
railroads should charge proportional
rates down TO North Carolina from
Virginia, on traffic from the West, in
stead Of the full local rates.
He was followed by. Corporation
lima, who discussed the details of the
settlement of the long-standing con-
sroy,ersy regarding rates between
| especially with reference TO the
departure from the fourth section of
the commerce act In the western part
ton forbids the charging OF Il higher
rate for short haul than Is charged
for long haul He declared If there
! proposed new rates 1t was more tech
meal ,h than than practieai; f Ne;, real benefit to
clared. should not be set aside because
of n technical point.
.. Mr. James, attorney. representing the
Travis in opposition TO the granting
| of the application, which. lie declared.
would work tremendous hardship upon
turb the whole rate situation between
| points on the Atlantic seaboard and
discriminate against Virginia cities
| been forced TO make the settlement
| with the North Carolina officials, and
| that 1t could not be justified on the
was simply agreed TO by. the carriers
because they wished to keep 'on the
| good side Of North Carolina people.
Pollard Presents Brief.
Attorney John Garland Pol
lard. OF Virginia, then presented brief
In the case. and addressed the commits
the history OF the case no strongly
emphasized the fact, that Virginia does
and believes she should have them.
But, he stated. IL they are granted
without relative reductions being given
and Cincinnati will benefit, Virginia
merehants Is VIII lose ;sn 9ortb tremend1us
benefit. The interests OF Virginia and
North Carolina. no declared, are SO in
terwoven that the rates to one state
could not be equitabiy considered with
out regard to rates TO the other.
Virginia IS not opposed TO North
said Attorney General Pollard. but
] insists, IL the rates are lowered, that
proper reductions shall also be made
from. and to-. Virginia cities at the
same time, and at least insists that Il
proper relationship OF interstate rates
es between North Carolina and Virginia
/ shall first be ascertained, according to
law by the tribunal created by Con
gress Interstate Commerce Commis-
sion) to determine such questions, and
that such relationship of Interstate
rates shall not be determined by pri-
vate agreement between tho railroads
in North Carolina and that State
! ITO grant the application of the rail
roads In this case Will work irreparable
inquiry to the Virginia cities, as tes-
titled by our representatives at the
lGreensboro hearing in December.
! I'VE suggest to this commission that
| this case be held in abcyance until the
! commission can take up the whole
4 i0laSflnn adjustment G q ia
rates between Virginia and North Caro-
lima and the West with n view to eal-
lowing an adjustment that Will be
equitable to Virginia.
| VIII A bnndon Power.
i IF an order is issued in this case.
which camC to the commission follow
Ing an agreement between the railroads
and the State OF North Carolina. will
| 1t not indicate it's approval OF the
making of interstate rates by tho State
political power. and thus bring about
| merce Commission of It's own pow ers !?
/ IF the carriers Sacrifice Virginia to
| buy the 'Rood-wiil OF North Carolina,
VIII the carriers not I'm turn arouse the
ill-will of Virginia. and thus destroy
the harmony which IL Is tho commits
sion's duty to maintain"
ment by II. Walton Moore. attorney for
| the railroads concerned. He outlined
the numerous cases before the COM
mission Of which the proposed rates
are a settlement. He showed that ow-
Ing to competitive conditions existing
In Virginia, and not in North Carolina,
higher rates in North Carolina than in
| Virginia. But no stressed the point
that there was nothing I'm the condi-
tions prevailing that would prevent tho
railroads from lowering r9tes In North
Carolina If they wanted to, and that
tho Virginia cities could make no sound
fi'c The commssion nj sH took the application
undor adyisement, and although IL was