The term "railroad" is defined in this section, beginning with line 24, as including “all bridges and ferries used or operated in connection with any railroad;" and to these words the following have been added: "And also all the road in use by any corporation operating a railroad, whether owned or operated under a contract, agreement or lease."

Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Senate bill, prohibiting discriminations, contained provisions in relation to the recovery of damages. These have been stricken out of said sections, and have been grouped together in one section, which is made section 8 of the committee bill. Except as to this rearrangement, substantially the only change made has been the addition of the provision of the House bill that " a reasonable counsel or attorney's fee" shall be allowed by the court in every case of the recovery of damages. The parts of said sections which are stricken out in consequence of the rearrangement referred to are all of section 2 after the word “unlawful," in line 13, all of section 3 after the word “business," in line 18, and lines 23 to 27, both inclusive, in section 4. No other change is made in section 2.

Section 3 is also amended by striking out the words "and proper," in line 12, and substituting therefor the words "proper and equal," so as to require railroads to afford " equal as well as "reasonable and proper" facilities to connecting roads for the interchange of traffic. Also, by striking out the words "but no such common carrier shall be required to give the use of its track or terminal facilities to another carrier engaged in like business," and by substituting therefor the following: "And shall not discriminate in their rates and charges between such connecting lines; but this shall not be construed as requiring any such common carrier to give the use of its tracks or terminal facilities to another carrier engaged in like business."

Section 4 of the Senate bill is amended by striking out the words "and from the same original point of departure or to the same point of arrival," in lines 7 and 8, and inserting in lieu thereof the words "the shorter being included within the longer distance; also, by inserting after the words "in special cases," in line 13, the words "after investigation by the commission."

ور

This section is further amended by striking out the following words in relating to the power of the commission to suspend the operation of the section, beginning in line 16:

Make general rules exempting such designated common carrier in such special cases from the operation of this section of this act; and when such exceptions shall have been made and published, they shall, until changed by the commission or by law, have like force and effect as though the same had been specified in this section.

And by substituting therefor the following words:

Prescribe the extent to which such designated common carrier may be relieved from the operation of this section of this act.

Section 19, requiring an immediate investigation by the commission of the necessity of legislation upon the subject of pooling, has been stricken out, and section 5 of the committee bill contains the provision of the House bill prohibiting pooling, with some modifications of the language.

Section 5 of the Senate bill has been replaced by section 6 of the committee bill, which combines most of the provisions of the Senate and

House bills upon the subject of publicity of rates. Section 5 made it the duty of the commission to secure publicity of rates as far as might be found practicable; not only the rates between points on each railroad, but rates over connecting lines as well. The new section requires each railroad to make public the rates between points upon its own line, and in addition the committee is directed to secure publicity of rates over connecting lines so far as may be found practicable.

Section 9 of the committee bill is an addition to the Senate bill, and provides that persons claiming to be damaged by the violation of the act by any common carrier may either make complaint to the commission as provided in the Senate bill, or may institute suits for the recovery of damages in their own behalf in the district or circuit courts of the United States.

Section 8 of the Senate bill has been changed so as to provide that the terms of the commissioners first appointed shall run for two, three, four, five, and six years, respectively, from January 1, 1887, without regard to the time of their appointment.

Section 9 of the Senate bill is amended by adding to the provisions for compelling officers of railroads to testify, when summoned by the commission, the following:

The claim that any such testimony or evidence may tend to criminate the person giving such evidence shall not excuse such witness from testifying; but such evidence or testimony shall not be used against such person on the trial of any criminal proceeding.

Section 20 of the Senate bill has been amended by inserting the following after word "religion" in line 8:

Nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent railroads from giving free carriage to their officers and employees, or to prevent the principal officers of any railroad company or companies from exchanging passes or tickets with other railroad companies for their officers and employees.

Also, by striking out all after line 9, and substituting therefor the following:

Existing at common law or by statute, but the provisions of this act are in addition to such remedies: Provided, That no pending legislation shall in any way be affected by this act.

MR. PLATT. Mr. President, as the report of the conference committee was not fully read, even the concluding formal part of it being omitted in the reading, the Senate was not informed by the reading of the report that I did not concur by my signature in the conclusions at which the conferees arrived. It is therefore, perhaps, proper that I should say at this time that I was unable to bring my mind to the signature of this report, and it is also perhaps fair that I should state, to some extent, the ground upon which I withheld my signature.

I think I should, though with great reluctance, have consented to all the provisions and recommendations of the report but one. I should have had great reluctance in subscribing to the recommendation for the change of the Senate provision relating to short hauls and long hauls; but if it had been necessary to get an agreement I think I would not have withheld my assent to that change. But I was unable to agree to the surrender of the provision in the Senate bill directing the commission, when it should be appointed, to make an immediate investigation of what is known as pooling between railroads and to report their conclusions and recommendations thereupon to Congress, and substitute therefor the

absolute prohibition under penalties of a thousand dollars a day for noncompliance, with the provision which was contained in the House bill or the House amendment to the Senate bill.

The

I will say now, however, that I think the public prejudice, if there be one, existing against pooling by railroads is largely the result of ignorance on the part of the public as to what railroad pools really are. Senator from Vermont [Mr. Edmunds] suggests "want of information." I do not know that the public is ever ignorant, but I do believe that there exists a very great deal of misapprehension in the public mind as to the nature, the effect, the result upon the general welfare of the country of pooling contracts between railroads; and I believe, as I thought the Šenate believed, that the bill as it was passed by the Senate was calculated to cure whatever evils had grown out of the system of railroad pooling, so that before the report of the commission which was provided for in the Senate bill upon this subject should be made, the people would have become convinced that the evils which they supposed to result from the pooling of freights by railroads were either imaginary or had been cured by the operation of the bill which was passed by the Senate.

I was not unmindful of the fact that all interstate commerce, so far as relates to freight, is to-day transacted under pooling arrangements by the railroads, and that an absolute prohibition of pooling was to break up at once, or, as the bill now reads, within sixty days after its passage, every arrangement by which the interstate commerce business of this country is at present conducted. It seemed to me, with my knowledge of the history of the management of railroads, and with my knowledge of legislation upon this subject, that the result would be an immediate rate-war by all the railroads of the United States. At least, that was my apprehension, and I believed that the evils and consequences which would result from that would be very much greater in their injurious effects upon the public, upon the prosperity of the country, than any evils which now exist by reason of what are known as pooling contracts. MR. CULLOM. Mr. President, I did not expect to say anything on the general subject of the bill, and I shall only add a word to what has been stated.

I think that my colleague on the committee is probably laboring under undue fear of the consequences of the passage of this bill on account of the prohibition of pooling. One of the purposes of the bill itself by requiring publicity of rates and preventing change of rates to a higher schedule, except on ten days' notice, is to bring about that stability of rates which the railroad companies themselves are appealing to us to have brought about, because under the system of pooling they have not been able to bring it about.

So, in my judgment, the apprehension of the Senator from Connecticut that it is going to be injurious to the business of the country will prove to be unfounded, at least I hope and I believe so. I think every Senator will bear me out in saying that I have not been disposed to consent to anything going into this bill that was unreasonable, at least in my own judgment. As I said a moment ago, I would not have consented to the provision of the bill prohibiting pooling if I believed it would bring upon the country that sort of trouble which the Senator from Connecticut indicates that he apprehends. Every one knows that the rail

road companies themselves have finally become reconciled to some national legislation, because they have not been able to protect themselves, one from another, and I think that the provisions of this bill in relation to publicity, and the other provisions to guard against various wrong-doings on their part, will have very great force and effect in bringing about that sort of stability which it has been the ostensible purpose at least of pooling to secure.

Every one knows that this question has been bandied about here from one Congress to another for many years, and Congress has never yet done anything on the subject. The Supreme Court of the United States, within the last two or three months, has made a decision which throws upon Congress the unquestionable duty of legislation regulating interstate commerce if we believe it ought to have any regulation. While the bill is not exactly as I wanted it, while it is not exactly the bill of the Senate, yet except as to the provision in regard to pooling it is practically the Senate bill, and I hope that Senators when the time comes for its consideration will allow the report to be concurred in.

REMARKS OF MR. WILSON, OF IOWA.

IN THE U. S. SENATE DEC. 21, 1886.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the Committee on Commerce on the bill (S. 1,532) to regulate commerce.

MR. WILSON, of Iowa.-Mr. President, it is more than a decade since the agitation which finds a result in the report now commanding our attention became active in Congress. It had moved upon the minds of the people and made its presence felt by the instrumentalities of state governments before it appeared here. At its inception it manifested staying powers which portented ultimate success. It was an assertion by disturbed conditions and interests of sections, localities, business of the forceful doctrine of equality on which our system of government is founded. It was a cumulative declaration that that doctrine is not confined in its application to the individual and his distinctive personal relations, but extends to all of the affairs, interests, and relations that are evolved and established by organized communities and movements of government. It was an assertion that the equality which has been our boast and pride from the beginning is a principle of society applicable to all things upon which government can act. Hence the agitation in the very nature of things had staying powers equal to all of the exactions which the struggle precedent to success might impose.

A comparatively new system of transportation had in effect and substantially reversed all of our methods of domestic trade and commerce. It had assaulted all of the doctrines of our long established law relative to the duties and responsibilities of common carriers. It had asserted a masterful control of the doctrine of equal rights, and established in its stead a practice of discrimination that at last shocked the people's sense of justice and fair play. It laid its usurping hand upon sections, localities, associations, and individuals, and all of their interests of trade, commerce, and business of whatsoever kind. It has steadily and unreasonably refused to recognize the simplest business principles, and marked out lines of action for itself, which has excited the resentment of almost every interest it was created to serve. It has made itself an intermeddler in almost every department of business and in almost every detail thereof. It has refused to admit that it was created to serve the proper purposes and interests of society, and has assumed to direct and control them. Not the public interests, but its own have been its study, forgetting that the true method of conserving the best conditions of both is to recognize the equal rights of each.

The managers of this system, while admitting great defects in it in respect of its own affairs, have resolutely opposed all efforts of the state and national governments to project and establish reforms which would tend to assure justice and promote the common interest, and this explains why some conservative and proper legislation for the regulation of the unsatisfactory conditions existing in the interstate commerce of the