missioners come in and make an exception? Then the railroads have got to put down the whole railroad transportation in cotton and food products in Massachusetts along their lines to the New York rates if they put down the exports from Boston to the New York rates, and that they can not do under the laws of trade, because, of course, the other road, which is 230 miles nearer, has the advantage.

MR. CULLOM. So far as this section is concerned, when a load of corn, wheat, cattle, or what not, is started from Chicago, there is nothing in this bill that prohibits the transportation company taking the product in a car from Chicago at exactly the same rate to Boston that it takes it to New York-not a single line. The only question, then, is a question as to whether the railroads will carry the products as cheaply to Boston as to New York. In my own judgment they will.

MR. HOAR. My friend does not still answer the question. Do you not prohibit them from carrying it to Boston at a less rate than they carry it to Springfield, or Worcester, or Fall River, or to any other point on the line in Massachusetts?

MR. CULLOм. At a less rate, yes.

MR. HOAR. That is exactly the point. We have got, therefore, have we not, under your bill to put down Worcester and Springfield and Fall River to the New York rate, or else Boston can not have the exports?

MR. CULLOM. Has the Senator any objection to having the rate put down? Is there any reason why the rates to New York and Boston should not be the same?

MR. HOAR. The roads can not live at those rates. My friend has got in his bill the general provision that they shall not charge anything' more than what is reasonable to those places. You have got the thing down under the operation of your bill to what is reasonable as an independent proposition.

MR. CULLOM. Has the Senator any objection to that?

MR. HOAR. Of course not. You have got it down to what is reasonable; now stop there. Then the railroad company says, "While I am doing this business for all New England, for all its local uses of every sort, food supply or supply of materials, at a reasonable rate and no more, which I am bound to do, I can in connection with that business take on in addition, at 5 per cent. rebate, these thirty millions which are going to Europe, if you let me; but if you say I shall not do that unless I put local rates for all Massachusetts at 5 per cent. below what is reasonable for them, I can not live, and the whole business must go to New York." That is the proposition.

Now, a man doing a business of transportation at a fair rate, a reasonable rate, and no more, may very often afford to take a particular piece of merchandise or merchandise for a particular destination at very much less than his usual rates. If the Senator should engage to take me with a hack over to Bladensburg this morning and charge me $10 for it, and that was a reasonable price and no more, and he should come across a man who was on his way there with a carpet-bag in his hand about to walk, and the man says, "I have not got but a dollar in my pocket and I will give you that," and he takes him on, that does not do me any

injustice, it does not do him any injustice, and it does not cause any loss. That is the attitude of the foreign commerce of every principal port.

What I want to know of the Senator now is, not to debate this matter, but to ascertain the meaning of the bill. Do I correctly understand him as saying that the right to continue that foreign commerce, in which the condition is what I have stated, to be dependent in the future under the act of Congress, on the opinion of five commissioners? More than that, is that foreign commerce to stop for a while, to be revived again a few months later, when the commission have organized and got around to this matter?

MR. CULLOM. Mr. President, it is pretty difficult to pass any act providing for any regulation whatever that may not appear to harshly interfere with what somebody is doing. Now, so far as I am concerned, I have no disposition to interfere with the foreign commerce of this country. I would very much prefer to see the foreign commerce increase, if it can be done consistent with the protection of the great masses of the people of this country outside of the seaports.

But here we are met with this condition of affairs-unjust discrimination, extortion, secret rebates, and all manner of unjust practices have been going on for years by the railroad corporations of this country because there has been no regulation of them by the Government of the United States. Now we come in with a bill that undertakes, in a moderate degree I think, to apply to them some sort of regulation. We say that there shall be no secret rebates; we say that there shall be no unjust discrimination; we say that there shall be no extortion. Then we come with the fourth section and say that there shall not be a greater charge for the shorter than for the longer distance over the same line under substantially similar circumstances, the shorter being included within the longer, and the property, of course, being of like kind.

Now, how are we ever going to regulate these railroads? The Senator from Massachusetts steps in and says that is going to interfere with the trade of Boston; it is going to stop the export trade and the import trade that is going on at the city of Boston. I do not know whether it will do so or not, but I do not believe it will because those words, as I said awhile ago, "under like conditions and circumstances," are words that the commission, that the railroad men, that the courts are bound to construe in the most liberal manner consistent with the actual honest commerce of this country.

A LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION MUST BE PUT UPON THE LAW.

I undertake to say that you can not pass any bill which will in any way restrict the traffic carried on by corporations unless you have something that will in some way appear to interfere with localities or with individual interests which are being carried on. I believe myself that those words "under similar conditions and circumstances " will open a way, if any way is necessary to be opened, so that the real commerce that is being conducted by Boston or New York or Philadelphia or any other seaport will go on without the slightest interruption. I do not believe that the Senator will find that his constituents in the city of Boston will be in the slightest degree interrupted in their foreign commerce which they are carrying on to-day, even if the very letter of the law should be enforced as the fourth section declares.

But I do not believe it will be enforced as the letter of it reads in all cases, but that a proper and liberal construction will be given by the courts and by the commission and by the railroads themselves to the words I have referred to. My own judgment is that if the common carriers of this country proceed right along in the discharge of their honest duties as common carriers and construe those words liberally so that they may carry the products of the West to the city of Boston to be transported to the people on the other side of the water, there will be no interference with that work by the commission, by the courts, or by anybody else. But if we are going to regulate these corporations at all, if we are going to stop unjust discrimination and the secret rebates by which towns are built up and towns are destroyed, by which individuals are destroyed and individuals are built up, we must have something in the bill which will mean something, or else we might as well lay the bill on the table and go at other business.

The limitations placed upon the prohibition that is made are very significant, and they must not be overlooked. They require that in determining the sum that may be charged for a shorter as compared with a longer distance, the comparison must be made

1. Between shipments "of like kind of property."

2.

3.

4.

"Under substantially similar circumstances and conditions."
"Over the same line."

"In the same direction."

5. When the shorter is "included within the longer distance.” When the act is to be applied in any given case to measure the charge that may be made for any distance, as compared with a longer distance, all of these limitations must be taken into account, and they must all apply to the case-not three or four of them, but all of them. The first, fourth, and fifth of these limitations do not appear to call for any explanation, but the meaning of the second and third may need some explanation.

66

THE LONG AND SHORT HAUL CLAUSE TO BE ENFORCED ACCORDING TO THE CONDITIONS THAT GOVERN RAILWAY TRAFFIC AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH IT IS TRANSPORTED."

As I understand them, the words " circumstances and conditions" mean the conditions that govern railway traffic, and the circumstances under which it is transported. To my mind these words are full of meaning. They comprehend all the circumstances and conditions that may justify differences in rates, such as competition with other railroads and with water routes, the volume and character of business at different points, the difference in terminal expenses, and the cost of service in each case. If the words used were "the same circumstances and conditions," ingenious railway gentlemen would be able to show that the circumstances and conditions were never exactly the same in any two cases. And they might also be able to show that they were not similar," if that was the word used. But the words “substantially similar " impart enough latitude to the comparison to enable the courts to exercise a sound discretion and common sense in passing upon cases that may arise.

So far as any one railroad company is concerned, therefore, the sum which it may charge for a haul from one end of its railroad to the other end becomes the maximum amount it can charge for any shorter haul

over that road in the same direction and under substantially similar circumstances and conditions when the shorter distance is included within the longer.

THE MEASURE OF THE CHARGE FOR A SHORTER DISTANCE IS THE SUM TO BE CHARGED FOR A LONGER DISTANCE.

But the question that seems to trouble those who object to the section as it stands is, whether the maximum thus fixed is the sum which a railroad company charges upon shipments originating at and destined to points upon its own road, or whether the maximum is the sum which it accepts as its share of a through rate upon shipments passing over its road which originate at or are destined to points upon another road. It seems clear to me that there can be but one answer to that question.

In the first place, the measure of the charge that may be made for the shorter distance is the sum that is charged for a longer distance over the same line and under substantially similar circumstances and conditions. The rates fixed by a railroad company between points upon its own road are clearly rates upon one line, or, in the terms of the bill, the same line." A railroad company can make and control the rates upon its own road, and the section says that in making such rates the short-haul principle shall be observed. A railroad company can not control rates over the road of another company. But, when two or more companies unite in making joint rates over their respective roads, they become in the eye of this bill one line, and this section says that the short-haul principle must be observed in making rates over that line, the two or more roads composing it being, within the meaning of the section, the same line so far as such joint rates are concerned. The word railroad is used throughout the bill and the word line is used only in this section. The courts will be bound to assume that the word line means something different from the word railroad, or it would not have been used in this one instance when the word railroad would naturally have been used if something different had not been intended. The word line means a railroad or a combination of railroads. It means a route. Section 7 of the bill requires the carriage of freights to be "treated as one continuous carriage from the place of shipment to the place of destination," and this could not be done in the case of shipments over connecting roads if the word used in this section was "railroad" instead of "line.'

MR. GEORGE.-Does the Senator wish to be understood as saying that it is the meaning of this bill that the long and short haul provision does not apply; that is, that the circumstances are not substantially similar, where one of the points is a competing point and where one is not?

MR. CULLOM.-I mean to say simply this: You take one railroad, if you please, between the city of Washington and the city of New York; that railroad makes its schedule of rates, and it publishes, under this bill, that schedule of rates, and so far as its operation on its own road, not in connection with other lines or roads, but on its own road, it is not at liberty to charge more for a shorter distance on that road between here and New York under like circumstances and conditions than it charges from here to New York.

MR. GEORGE.-But the point is this: I understood the Senator to say-and that is what I want to have settled-that if one point from

which the shipment is made is a competitive point, either by having a competing railroad or by having water transportation, and the other point from which the shipment is made is not a competitive point, then the circumstances are not substantially similar.

MR. CULLOM.-I do say the facts should be considered.

MR. GEORGE.-Then let me say that, if I believed that that was the meaning of the bill and the courts would assent to it, I would vote against it, because with that construction upon those words the whole provision in the bill in reference to the long and short haul amounts to nothing.

MR. CULLOM.-If it does not amount to anything, it will not hurt anybody.

MR. GEORGE.-I do not want to hurt anybody, but to save somebody by a substantial provision on that subject.

MR. CULLOM. So do I; but I do not want to humbug anybody either. The Senate, however, by a deliberate vote placed in the bill which was passed by the Senate during last session these words, "under like circumstances and conditions," and did it, the select committee not having reported those words to the Senate in the original bill.

MR. GEORGE. I do not object to the words. I object to the interpretation which you put upon them. I do not believe that is the true and legal interpretation, and I protest that this bill shall go through here with an authoritative exposition or interpretation of the meaning of these words given them by the Senator. If that be the meaning I am against it.

MR. CULLOM. The Senator from Mississippi has a right to put whatever_construction on those words he chooses, and of course he will do so; but I say, not as the chairman of the committee, but simply as a Senator upon this floor, that those words were put in there by this Senate after the select committee had failed to report them, and they were put there because the original section reported by the committee was too rigid and it was feared that it would interjere with the general commerce of the country, and when they were put there they were put there to mean something, and they do mean something.

They mean just what they say, that you shall not charge more for the shorter than for the longer distance on the same line in the same direction under substantially similar circumstances and conditions, and those conditions and circumstances may be, if you please, the fact that one place is a competing point and that another place is not, the fact that one place furnishes a large amount of business and the way-station does not furnish perhaps more than a car-load, and that it incurs additional expense and all that sort of thing. No court, no commission, and no lawyer can afford to say that those words do not mean anything wfien they are put in there.

MR. GEORGE. With that construction of it, I think the Senator gives away all the beneficial part of the bill.

MR. ČULLOM. The Senator does no such thing. The fact to-day is and I want the Senator from Mississippi to hear it

MR. GFORGE. I will listen.

MR. CULLOM. The fact to-day is that there is an utter disregard by the railroads of the country of the circumstances that there are thousands and tens of thousands of shipments made under exactly similar circum