The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1922-06-27
NEVADA NEUTRAL
IN R. R. DIVORCE

looks on and We can thank God fo,
once that the fight is entirely II
their hands," declared w. H. Sim
mons, member Of the Nevada publ;,
service commission, in speaking a,
the Lions Club luncheon TODAY on
the present railroad problem
brought about by the isureme
courts decision in ordering a dis.
solution Of the Central and South.
ern Pacific railroads.
Mr.. Simmons, who spent two DAYS
in San Francisco this week as rem.
resentative of Nevada at a meeting
Of the railroad commissions of west.
ern states, at which the question of
asking the supreme court to grant
a rehearing in the case, was dis
cussed. He told the business men
that he took the position that Ne.
vada, at this time, was not inter.
ested to any extent and was there.
z fore neutral.
At the outset of his talk he de.
clared that he held no brief for the
Union Pacific nor the Southern Pa.
cific, that his stand at the San Fran
cisco meeting was not against the
Southern Pacific, and furthermore
that at this time he did not pretend
to know or to have any reason to
believe that Nevada would be either
benefited or injured If the decision
Of the supreme court is carried out.
1T Is my contention now and was
my contention at the San Francisco
meeting that any effort at this time
to have the interstate commerce
commission intervene under the por-
visions Of the Esch-C ummins act Of
1920, on the theory that the con-
solidation feature of the act super
cedes the Sherman antitrust law,
would be equal to recalling a judi
cial decision Of our federal court
and this Is not proper STEP" he
declared.
II contended that the divorce has
been ordered and that it should be
allowed to 60 into effect and then,
through proper procedure II it be-
comes apparent that consolidation
Of certain roads is necessary for
the public benefit, the interstate
commerce commission could take
steps under the provisions Of the
Esch-C ummins act. It is my con-
tention that this act does not give
the interstate commerce commission
express authority to compel roads
to consolidate but it can recommend
consultations which would not be-
come effective until after q proper
hearing in which the railroads, the
states and the shippers are given
the fullest consideration"
Mr.. Simmons traced the history
Of the present railroad development
through which the Southern Pacific
acquired the stock in the Central
Pacific when e. II. Hartman con-
trolled the Union Pacific and
wanted control Of the line through
to the coast.
Mr.. Hartman could not secure
control of the Central Pacific as
the Southern Pacific controlled it
but he did secure control Of the
Southern Pacific which was virtually
the same thing. and the supreme
court in 1912 ordered dissolution,
and II was carried out.
II asked the San Francisco rep
resentative and the representatives
Of the Southern Pacific Company to
show me where Nevada would be
hurt II the mandate of the supreme
court was carried out and they
could not do it. 1t was contended
that the dissolution might close
the shops at Sparks but the rails are
not going to be torn up, the tranic
Is not going to be disturbed and no
matter whether the Union Pacific
or the Southern Pacific has control
Of the road the shops will be needed
just the same. j.
at was apparently the view OF
those at the San Francisco confer
ence that there was not the re-
hottest possibility of the supreme
court reversing its decision and no
one was very certain that re-
hearing would be granted. Inc
divorce has taken place and 1t VIII
remain and it is not a matter OF
any moment to Nevada whether tne
Union Pacific or Southern Pac'he
operates the line. We can take
neutral position justly and despite
A. t,xao If San fT0n-