New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-02-19
SAYS new HAVEN
MAY TIE Up SHIPS
Official Tells the Commits
siOner Divorce of Lines
Might End Service.

The suggestion that the New Haven
road might tie up steamship freight
business by taking the boats that make
I'D is five water lines out OF service
in the event of an order divorcing raj
from water business was made at the
hearing before Interstate Commerce
Commissioner Judson c. Clements yes
terday.
Many witnesses we're before NJ.
Clements 10 testify for OF against the
application Of the New Haven to con
tinue to own and operate it's water
lines. when Vice President J. Rowland
Gardner. OF the New England Steam
ship Company. made the remarks that
provoked a new line Of questioning.
81 am curious to know whether there
would not be more competition II the
water lines were cut loose from the
railroads" said Commissioner Clements
at one point Of the questioning.
well, it seems to me that if owned
these lines I would not place them On
the auction block, but would stop OPP
GRAFTON and wait until some one came
to me and paid me what thought they
were worth" was the reply Of the
steamboat official.
apo ! understand you TO make a
threat as TO what you would do If these
lines were cut loose from the rail
roads ?" demanded Mr.. Clements.
81 do not intend TO make any
threats in this matter" replied Mr.
Gardner, with equal heat.
Mr. Gardner added, however, that he
thought the Acknowledgement OF the
lines now operated by the New Haven
would dry up" competition-a thing
the Panama Canal act contemplate
preventing. Lawyers for the Ne
Haven came to the aid of the witnes
then and ne was led into a discussio
of the service the lines were credite
with giving under the present man
agement.
But that is not answering my ques
ton as to why separation OF the rail
road from the steamship lines woul1
dry up competition" interrupted Com
missioner Clements. you made the
unqualified statement that the divorce
of the railroads would have that effect.
How and why would it?"
II. II. Elder, attorney for the Inter
state Commerce Commission, inter
rupted the witness 10 say that Mr..
Gardner had indicated that the rail
road would hold the boats and sell
them TO persons in foreign waters II
vtos tod n
operate them. The result OF such &C
ton would be to materially inconven-
fence New England shippers, especial
" those making use Of water routes.
al did not say that directly or indi-
rectly. or even intimate IT," said Mr..
Gardner 81 merely intimated that we
would hold the boats and sell them one
at time" 3,
You could not even do that" said
Mr.. Elder. you would have to hold
the boats subject 70 the dictum OF the
courts"
& The discussion had quoted down to
another series OF comments on the eX-
cellent service of the New Haven and
its subsidiary water lines, when MI
Gardner again announced that the
boats would be held and sold separate
/ ~ if divorced from the railroads.
Then Mr.. Elder produced a copy OF
q decree of the United States District
Court under which it was explicitly
set forth that no road could dispose
OF its water lines until after a decision
bv the Interstate Commerce Commits
sion. and that after such decision they
would have TO be held pending modi-
fcations of the decree. This. he said.
ought TO answer for all time any asser-
tons that the five lines and the boats
of which they are composed would be
taken out of the freight business.