OCR Text |
Show pRONG AND PRICKETT PASSES AT RAIL HEARING I; Utah California and Oregon, Heard I' Attack Separation Order of Wr y' Supreme Court. I j CltlMIW 25 "on tSrate com-SVr com-SVr tJi South-.SSo South-.SSo to retain 2j pacific, even 5S S;;rdhaa gRni the , court E uh State Scnr phrased "' ' g? v Scandrctt, inn Pacific. sug-Btttaallon sug-Btttaallon that thr witnesses Imams" S Qraln Orowcrs. Z Portland. Ore-BM Ore-BM W. : h and 0. S. LtoUvea of other tracked the scp-0S scp-0S tho jfj1 j commerce The ,0Dy was that tho. ire rendering fair b!,- rates now and t iffected adverse-, t otttr Intervened ITelch If Joint use tvo railroads af-1 uld not remove n' objections. The aid not tell, it? railroad com-Jeard com-Jeard on the issue j IROVHENTS. j ?Ktod the argu- lie Southern Pa-1 ion would require tro MW company. organisations to handle what is now on BTBtem. Thi sort of an additional addi-tional burden upon transportation, hfl asserted, wa exactly what congress con-gress Intended to nvold by the plan for general consolidation of railroads. rail-roads. His argument that tho separation would rn!i- result in a new consolidation consol-idation the Central Pacific going to the Union Pacific, he said. was basod upon personal information. "I must assume that it is the desire de-sire of the Union Pacific to a.s&unie this control," Mr Prlckett declared, "because I was recently so advise, 1 l.y a vlr.. president "f the Union j';cific Such a cpdltton would be very undesirable from the standpoint of the public Interest Ot the state of Utah." His OWN JUDGMENT. That Mr Prlekett was "taking counsel ot his fears," was suggested by H. A Scandrctt In beginning . i . -. i ii I nal Ion In 1 . . h i ! f of the Union Pacific, but the witness ns-pjcrted ns-pjcrted that he hmi exercised only hi Judgnv nl Tho unanimity with Which Utah luslnrsfmen supported the Southern Pacific"'! application also was disputed bv tVx nn.nlnm and several Interchanges resulted. Mr. Prl kett asserted at oho point that the. Union Pacific representative representa-tive was Insulting the Fait Iike chamber of commerce by inslnua-; inslnua-; Hons by Intimating that iiscon- elusions were not unanimous against the proposed separation RMSTIlOf; WITNESS "We are taking counsel of our fears in opposing the separation of the Southern Pacific from the Central Cen-tral Pacific," W W Armstrong, operator op-erator of a chain of banks ln Utah .-tnd netichrxirliiK stat.-s declared 'be-eause 'be-eause It Is nir f.'.ar that the Central Pa If 1 c mat f-l into control of the Union Pa. iflc and if that results our territory will .be faced with a practical prac-tical monopoly of transportation." Utah producers and business interests in-terests need "competitive markets served by sympathetic and competitive competi-tive transportation systems," Mr Armstrong added. Mr Scandrett cross-examining, asked if present railroad facilities afforded the sym-pathetlc sym-pathetlc competitive .service and the witness replied that ho "hoped so " |