« PreviousContinue »
transportation company or companies shall carry traffic between any points over à route or routes located entirely within one State, in competition with other companies whose lines between said points are located in more than one State, such company shall, as a condition precedent to the granting of such license, agree to establish the rates between such points, and post schedules thereof, in the manner prescribed in and be subject to the provisions of the fifth section of this act. Such license shall be renewable each year, and may be suspended by the said board for cause, after full hearing, and upon the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction may be revoked by the said board for a violation of its terms or of the provisions of this act.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Jersey offers the amendment which has been read.
Mr. CULLOM. I understood that the Secretary was to read all the Senator's amendments for information. Which amendment is now bebefore the Senate ?
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Only one amendment can be offered at a time. The one pending is that just read.
Mr. PLATT. I should like to make a suggestion to the Senator from New Jersey. I see that he uses in line 4 of his amendment the language "the board of commissioners," and in several other places “the board," but the word used all through the bill is commission." I think he ought to change his amendment.
Mr. SEWELL. I will put it in that form and I will substitute the amendment I now send up for the one offered, which conforms to the language used in the bill generally.
Mr. CULLOM. The Senator had better withdraw the amendment already offered.
Mr. SEWELL. I will substitute this for it.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Jersey withdraws the amendment which has been read and offers a modified amendment, which will be read.
The CHIEF CLERK. The proposed amendment is to insert after section 5, as a new section, and change the numbers of succeeding sections accordingly, the following:
SEC. 6. That from and after ninety days after this act shall take effect it shall be unlawful for any common carrier, subject to the provisions of this act, to engage in the transportation of passengers or property without having first procured from the commission established by this act a license authorizing such carrier to engage in such transportation, and one of the conditions of such license shall be the acceptance of this act by such common carrier and of such regulations as said commission may lawfully make in pursuance thereof. And where any route over which traffic shall be carried between the several States and Territories of the United States includes as a part thereof a railway or water route outside of the United States, no license shall issue for the transportation of passengers or property over such route unless the common carrier or carriers controlling the portions of such route situated within the United States become responsible for and guarantee the observance by those controlling the portion of the route outside thereof of the terms and conditions of such license. And when any common carrier or carriers shall carry traffic between any points over a route or routes located entirely within one State in competition with other companies whose lines between said points are located in more than one State, such carrier or carriers shall, as a condition precedent to the granting of such license, agree to establish and publish the rates between such points in the manner prescribed in, and be subject to all the provisions of, the fifth section of this act. All licenses issued shall be renewable each year, and may be suspended by the said commission for cause after full hearing, and upon the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction may be revoked by the said commission for a violation of its terms or of the provisions of this act.
Mr. SEWELL. The changes between that and the amendment I first offered are simply to conform to the language used in the bill, changing “corporation” to common carrier," and matters of that kind. The general scope of the amendment is to bring within the provisions of the act railroad lines that traverse Canada in competition with our lines running east and west, without which an act of this kind would be burdensome on the interstate commerce of our routez, We should be left at the mercy of competition by Canadian lines if they were not governed by our laws, as they would not be without the adoption of this amendment. If the bill were passed as it is, it would tie the hands of our great lines running east and west under the charters of our States, and surrender the field to the Canadian lines.
In addition to that, this amendment would bring within the provisions of this interstate-commerce act as proposed the lines that run through one State in competition with lines that run through two or three States to the same point. I will give the instance of the New York Central running to a point on the lakes, both its starting-point and its terminus being within one State. It would not be within the provisions of the act without this amendment. There are lines running through New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania to and from the same points which come within the provisions of the act. That would be one instance where it would work to the disadvantage of the general railroad interests of the country. The New York line would be governed by the State law, while the lines running through New Jersey and other States would be governed by the interstate-commerce act of Congress. I submit that it would be a great injustice to those lines to oblige them to come under this act, and leave the line running in one State to be perfectly free to act in the matter of competition, in the matter of rates, and in the changes of their schedules as they saw fit.
Mr. INGALLS. Is this amendment in print?
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It has been somewhat modified, but the original is in print. The question is on the amendment proposed by the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. SEWELL).
Mr. MILLER. I suggest that this amendment lie over and be printed. Undoubtedly there will be another day for this bill. I confess I do not entirely understand the scope of the amendment. Certainly the case cited by the Senator as to a road in New York running from New York city to the lakes is not exactly correct, because the bili as it now stands controls the transportation of all interstate commerce wherever the railroad company connects with or forms a continuous line to another State, or where part of it is by rail and part of it by water. So any New York line connecting with a line of steamers upon the lakes would come directly under the provisions of the bill as it now stands, and it is not subject to the objection presented by the Senator.
Mr. SEWELL. The Senator from New York fails to understand my explanation. There are some lines that run through one State to a given point, while another line reaching the same competing point runs through two or three States. The latter would come under the provisions of this interstate-commerce bill, while the line running through one State would not come under the provisions of the bill without this amendment.
Mr. MILLER. May I ask the Senator a question? Is it possible that Congress can legislate upon a line confined entirely to the limits of one State for the business upon that line not going any farther or wnnected with any line beyond it? If the object of the amendment is to produce that result, it seems to me that it should have a good deal of consideration before Congress shall undertake to assume any such authority as that. If the amendment proposes to do that thing, it had better be considered very carefully by the Senate before it acts upon it, or it had better reject it at the start.
Mr. MCMILLAN. If this amendment is to go over and be printed, I desire to offer another amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FRYE in the chair). An amendment to the pending amendment ?
Mr. MCMILLAN. No, sir, an amendment to the bill, so that it can be printed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota proposes an amendment which he asks to have printed. That order will be made.
Mr. ALLISON. Let it be read.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The proposed amendment will be read for information.
The CHIEF CLERK. The proposed amendment is to insert after the word "lake,” in line 13 of section 4, the words : Or by a parallel railroad not within the jurisdiction of the United States.
Mr. CULLOM. The amendment offered by the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. SEWELL) is exactly the printed amendment that is upon the tables of the Senators, except that as now presented it is amended to conform in the use of terms with the other provisions of the bill. So I think there is no difficulty in Senators seeing what the amendment means without having any delay on account of it. I would like to proceed with the consideration of this bill and dispose of amendments either by rejecting them or adopting them as rapidly as a proper consideration of them will justify. If we are going to call up these amendments now and have them printed and laid over, substantially we adjourn the consideration of the subject.
Mr. MILLER. I do not desire to make any request that the bill be postponed or that the amendments lie over. So far as I am concerned, I am prepared as one of the committee to meet them now. If the Senator from New Jersey thinks his amendment is one of great importance and should be acted on, it certainly can not be acted on intelligently by the body at this time. It is not understood by the Senate at all.
Mr. CULLOM. I will make another suggestion, if the Senator from New York will allow me. If this amendment should be adopted at all, it would be an entirely new section. It can be put in the bill, if the Senate sees proper to put it in, at some future stage of the consideration of the bill as well as at present.
Mr. INGALLS. Will the Senator permit me to ask him if this amendment has received the consideration of the committee?
Mr. CULLOM. This amendment substantially was before the committed and rejected.
Mr. INGALLS. Then I understand this amendment is here with an adverse report from the committee.
Mr. CULLOM. I state the simple truth.
Mr. INGALLS. I mean has it been reported upon by the committee to the Senate?
Mr. CULLOM. The committee simply considered the amendment, or the substance of it, and rejected it.
Mr. INGALLS. In committee?
Mr. CULLOM. And reported the bill without any such provision in it. The bill now before the Senate for consideration does not contain such a provision.
Mr. INGALLS. Did the bill as originally introduced contain a provision similar in terms to this?
Mr. CULLOM. The proposition was originally before the committee and was considered by the committee and rejected, if I may be allowed to refer to what was done in committee.
I desire to indicate again that if there is any hesitation in reference to the consideration of this provision to-day, it will form, if adopted, an entirely new section, and can be considered at a future time if the bill is not disposed of to-day, so that we may go on now with the consideration of the bill as it stands.
Mr. INGALLS. Will not the Senator be good enough, as this matter has been considered by the committee of which he is chairman, to state the grounds upon which it was adversely considered by the committee?
Mr. CULLOM. The committee did not believe that such a provision was practicable and that it could be put into execution within any reasonable time. Therefore the committee believed that as this was an initiatory measure, the first bill proposing to regulate interstate transportation, we ought not to undertake to incorporate all the provisions which anybody might think were necessary in order to make a perfect bill.
So far as I am individually concerned, I will take the liberty of saying that I was inclined to believe that if such a provision could be executed it might be of public utility, in the light of what the Senator from New Jersey suggests, so that the roads running through Canada should not get any advantage on accountof our attempt to regulate interstate commerce in the United States.
Mr. INGALLS. May I ask the Senator upon what ground in the opinion of the committee it could be claimed that Congress could exercise jurisdiction over a railroad both of whose termini were within the limits of a State ?
Mr. CULLOM. The committee has not undertaken to exercise any such jurisdiction.
Mr. MILLER. I will suggest to the chairman that that portion of the amendment certainly never was considered by the committee favorably, or, as I understand, by any member of the committee.
Mr. CULLOM. Not at all, so far as that feature of it is concerned. The only subject that was considered by the committee in connection with the license question was in view of the fact, taking the Grand Trunk road for instance, which begins in Chicago, runs to the Detroit River, then runs through Canada, and then down to Portland, Me., whether there ought not to be some provision which would require license at the ends of the road in the United States to do interstate business, so that when a through bill of lading was issued at Chicago by the Grand Trunk Railroad for goods to be shipped to Portland, running through Canada, whether by such a provision we could not get control of that through bill of lading so as to take away the advantage which a Canadian road would have over an American road in case there was no such legislation enacted.
Mr. ALLISON. Did the committee decide that Congress could take no note of these foreign corporations acting in connection with our own roads?
Mr. CULLOM. Not at all.
Mr. ALLISON. There is no provision in the bill relating to that subject?
Mr. CULLOM. Not any further than will be found in the first section of the bill in undertaking to regulate foreign commerce so far as interstate shipments by rail are concerned, which is mentioned in the first section of the bill.
Mr. SEWELL. Will the Senator from Illinois state to the Senate that he expects a through line on our side to compete with a Canadian line unless we have some control over the termini of that line? How is it possible with a line in the center giving rebates and drawbacks which you wish to govern by this bill for the lines chartered by our States running parallel to compete for our interstate business?
Mr. CULLOM. It is pretty difficult to control a road in a foreign country, I admit, and it may be that there is no possible legislation which will accomplish that end; but I am not inclined to believe there is that danger to American commerce resulting from the fact that there is a Canada road which very many interested in railroad operations here believe will underbid our lines. So far as I am concerned I am anxious to throw around the American roads all possible safeguards that we can consistently enforce to protect them from injury while we are regulating them, knowing the fact that there are roads outside of this country for which we can not legislate. I do not know myself, even if we should adopt a license system, whether after that were done it would be possible to control shipments going through Canada so that the shippers might not if they desired to do it get some advantage; but the committee thought that while there might be some merit in this amendment, yet there are fifteen hundred railroads in this country, and that if we undertake to start the operation of this law by a system of licensing all the roads in this country it would be probably another year before we could get ready to operate under the law at all; so that the judgment of the committee was that it would be impolitic to insert such a provision in the bill at this time.
Mr. CONGER. Mr. President, my attention has just been called to this amendment. Without thoroughly understanding its provisions, it seems to me the amendment may be made to control almost every water communication for the transportation of freight in the United States. That is probably its object. The Senator from New Jersey undoubtedly desires to throw on all-rail routes the immense products of the West and compel shipments to go through the magnificent State of New Jersey, whether the shippers will or not. That is a very commendable object for the Senator from New Jersey. Unfortunately for New Jersey the dimensions of the State were made originally so small that there are other ways of getting from the great West to the great East without going through New Jersey.
All here will bear witness to the fact, every man who has thought at all upon the subject or has traveled a little must say, that wherever New Jersey could control any traffic or any passenger fare through that State, it has laid its mailed hand upon the people and compelled contributions to the State of New Jersey to carry on its government, feed its paupers, educate its people, and do alt by charging contributions upon men, women, and children passengers. All the human family who have been happy enough to travel through that delightful region of the universe New Jersey used to pay tribute to New Jersey for all possible and conceivable objects of State government. They ran along for years charging a dollar a head for going through that paradise of the world, I do not know but more, on any railroad. If a foot-passenger had to cross a bridge that belonged to a railroad company, he had to pay his dollar to the railroad company for the benefit of the State or else go around several miles in that delectable State, and he must either ford the stream if fordable, swim across it if he were a swimmer, drown if he attempted it without being a swimmer, or pay his dollar to the railroad company for the benefit of the State.
Within the limited and comparatively well-known dimensions of the State of New Jersey, stretching as it does, unfortunately for the rest of the people of the United States, north and south so that we must go through part of it or go around a good deal of it, I would be perfectly