The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1922-10-31


will prevent transportationS companies from charg
ing more for short haul than for long haul over
the same line
WHAT DID PITMAN DO FOR US?
Senator Pittmans record in connection with the
efforts of his constituents to eliminate the backhau
provision is very interesting and convicts him of
being absolutely disinterested and unconcerned
to what the result of Nevada's fight should be.
In 1919 the Nevada railroad commission and
various commercial organizations throughout the
state decided to make final effort to have the
ruinous back-haul provision eliminated. On De-
cember g. 1918, Senator Pittman had been ap-
pointed member of the Interstate Commerce Com
mittee of the senate and those back OF the move
ment felt that he would be able to give them very
valuable assistance.
When Congress again went into Republican con-
troll in 1919 it became evident that the Republicans
would make effort to place provision in the
transportation act that would prevent greater
charge for short haul than for long haul over
the same line Senator Pitman was appealed to as
member of the Interstate Commerce Committee
to aid in the movement
1t was with great surprise, therefore, that Nevada
people learned that Senator Pttman did not intend
asking for reappointment on the Interstate Com
merce Committee. Some OF the most prominent
men in the state urged him to remain on the COM
mittee and to lend his aid to the movement to
eliminate the back-haul charge provision that was
throttling the retailers and consumers of Nevada.
He remained deaf to their pleadings and chose a
place on the Foreign Relations Committee, aban-
doning his position on the Interstate Commerce
Committee He served the latter committee
from December 3, 1913, to May %, 1919.
WHAT WAS THE RESULT?
Let's see what the direct result of Pittman's with
drawal from the Interstate Commerce Committee
at this critical time was The transportation act
Commerce Committee for consideration. When it
was reported by chat committee proposed amend
ment which would have prevented greater charge
for short haul than for long haul over the same
line reported unfavorably by the committee.
The unfavorable report was signed by bare ma
jority of the committee.
HAD PITTMAN REMAINED ON THE COM
MITTEE AND VOTED AS HIS CONSTITUENTS
IN NEVADA HAD A RIGHT TO SUPPOSE HE
WOULD VOTE THE AMENDMENT ELIMINAT-
ING THE BACK-HAUL WOULD HAVE BEEN
REPORTED FAVORABLY.
When the amendments proposing to eliminate
the back-haul charge were taken up in the Senate
both in Committee of the Whole and in the Senate
proper, Senator Pittman is recorded as not voting
HERE is PROOF THAT PITTMAN
SIDESTEPPED
But the most surprising thing in connection with
the long and short haul incident occurred after the
matter had been disposed of. The bill was passed
in December, 1919, when Pittman was not on the
Interstate Commerce Committee.
On July z, 1921, Pittman was reapponted on
the Interstate Commerce Committee. In other
words, after the battle had been fought and he
considered there longer any danger of the
committee having to wrestle with that particular
question, he again sought and obtained place on
THE COMMITTEE.
What do you suppose, free thinking Ameri-
citizens, actuated Pittman? Whom do you
suppose he serving, the railroads and Pacific
Coast Wholesalers his constituents in Nevada?
Isn't the answer obvious!
REPUBLICAN, STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE
S. E. ROSS, Chairman w. r. ADAMS, Secretary
ADVERTISEMENT