ject to part I, II, or III of this act, shall be denied because of the relationship ween such corporation and such common carrier." We are in accord with the purposes of these amendments, and we recommend t the bill, if amended as suggested above, be enacted. espectfully submitted. WALTER M. W. SPLAWN, TEMENT OF CHARLES E. BLAINE & SON, TRAFFIC MANAGERS, PHOENIX, ARIZ. . 2712, as amended (in the nature of a substitute), proposes to amend subsec-is 410 (a), (b), (c), and (d) of the act subjecting freight forwarders to the uirement for obtaining certificates of public convenience and necessity, and to xe applicable to such forwarders the uniform provisions of the law concerning binations and consolidations of carriers. The Commission has made no recommendation in its annual reports to the ngress on which this bill is based. Moreover, we have long taken the position t the railroads themselves should perform the service which has been and is ng performed by the freight forwarders through separate, distinct, and pyraled organizations, and thus save the shipping public the burden of paying rates. ential to yield duplicate or dual profits to the carriers. At present the rates of railroads and motor carriers charged the forwarders naturally include some-ng for profit for such carriers. Then the forwarders must likewise have a fit; and the rates which they charge the shipping public include the profit ained by the railroads, and the profit for the forwarders. This attempt to more thoroughly clothe the forwarders with the status of comn carriers is, in our opinion, repugnant to the public interest, and there may he a time when the law will be amended, so as to give the shipping public in ual practice "transportation service at the lowest cost consistent with the nishing of such service," instead of in theory only as at present. Therefore, we recommend that our principals oppose S. 2712. (NOTE.-Statements on S. 2712 and S. 2715 were filed under S. 2713 April 9 by the following: A. M. Corkery, traffic manager, Scruggsndervoort-Barney, Inc., St. Louis, Mo.; O. W. Willenberg, traffic nager, Stix, Baer & Fuller Co., St. Louis, Mo.; and L. F. Dumont, affic department, Fred Meyer, Inc., Portland, Oreg. (Also concerning S. 2712 are statements filed April 9 by Frank A. ffingwell, secretary-treasurer, Texas Industrial Traffic League (under 2754); and Hon. Charles Sawyer, Secretary of Commerce, (with S.. 13).) DOMESTIC LAND AND WATER TRANSPORTATION 2713, a Bill To Provide Standards for Exemption Front Part IV of the Interstate Commerce Act. [S. 2713, 82d Cong., 2d sess., by Mr. Magnuson] LL To amend the Interstate Commerce Act, as amended, to provide more definite standards for ermining who is entitled to exemption fro.n part IV of said Act as an association of shippers or a ships' agent e it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of erica in Congress assembled, That subsection (c) of section 402 of the Interstate merce Act is amended (1) by adding, at the beginning of the section: "(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection"; and (2) by adding the following new paragraph: (2) If the Commission finds, after hearing in an investigation instituted on plaint or upon its own motion, that it is necessary to carry out the purposes is part and the provisions of the national transportation policy to apply the visions of this part to any person described in paragraph (1) of this subsection, all by order so declare, whereupon the provisions of such paragraph shall onger apply to such person. In the administration of this paragraph the mission shall consider, among other things, the nature and scope of the activiin question; their effect upon the operations of regulated freight forwarders: whether or not the activities are conducted in good faith within the purview aragraph (1) of this subsection and without intent to evade the law. As ing on the foregoing considerations, due weight shall be given to the question hether or not the involved activities are actually and substantially competitive the operations of regulated freight forwarders; whether they are limited to handling of a single commodity or of homogeneous commodities; whether or the number of persons participating in or benefiting from the activities in stion is such as to justify removal of the exemption; and whether or not the rations of the person claiming exemption have been such as to constitute air or destructive competitive practices within the meaning of the national sportation policy declared in this Act." [S. 2713, 82d Cong., 2d sess.] AMENDMENT (IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE) Submitted April 1, 1952 ended to be proposed by Mr. Johnson of Colorado (by request) to the bill 5. 2713) to amend the Interstate Commerce Act, as amended, to provide more efinite standards for determining who is entitled to exemption from part IV f said Act as an association of shippers or a shippers' agent, viz: Strike out all fter the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following: 'hat subsection (c) of section 402 of the Interstate Commerce Act is amended ead as follows: (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, the provisions his part shall not be construed to apply (A) to the operations of a shipper, or a ip or association of shippers, in consolidating or distributing freight for themes or for the members thereof, on a nonprofit basis, for the purpose of securing benefits of carload, truckload, or other volume rates, or (B) to the operations warehouseman or other shippers' agent, in consolidating or distributing pool 3, whose services and responsibilities to shippers in connection with such operais are confined to the terminal area in which such operations are performed. "(2) After hearing in an investigation instituted on its own motion or upon complaint the Commission shall, by order, remove the application of paragraph (1) of this subsection to any person if it finds that the activitis of such person are not being conducted solely for the purposes of and within the limitations specified in such paragraph, or that the removal of such application is necessary to carry out the purposes of this part and the provisions of the national transportation policy. In the administration of this paragraph the Commission shall consider, among other things which in its opinion are pertinent and relevant, the facts and circumstances surrounding the organization and establishment of such activities; the scope of the activities, geographically and as to commodities handled and persons served; the basis of charges, if any, for the service or services provided; and the extent such activities are in competition with the services of freight forwarders subject to this part." UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE, Washington, D. C., Tuesday, March 4, 1952. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a. m. in room G-16, United States Capitol, Washington, D. C., Senator Johnson of Colorado (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Johnson of Colorado, Tobey, and Bricker. Also present: E. R. Jelsma, staff director, Subcommittee on Domestic Land and Water Transportation, and F. J. Keenan, assistant clerk of the committee. STATEMENT OF JOHN V. LAWRENCE, MANAGING DIRECTOR AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS, INC. Mr. LAWRENCE. Senate 2713, introduced by Senator Magnuson, also having to do with freight forwarders: I might state that we support the bill and without going into an extensive discussion as we appear before this committee and the House committee at length when freight forwarder legislation was under discussion, and at that time we went on record and explained our views in connection with these association of shippers and similar organizations at which this bill is directed. We felt that it was aimed at uncovering any masquerade used as a device to get around regulations, so we supported the bill. The Interstate Commerce Commission has from time to time asked for additional legislation to afford it adequate investigatory powers to make sure that those claiming exemption under 402 (c) were in bona fide operation under that section and not persons masquerading in that guide. We feel that once the Commission has been directed by Congress to regulate a particular phase of transportation, the legislation required to do so should be adequate. In supporting this particular bill we do not necessarily endorse the language contained in it, but rather its purpose, which we understand is as I have stated. UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE, Washington, D. C., Monday, March 24, 1952. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a. m. in room 6, United States Capitol, Washington, D. C., Senator Johnson of orado (chairman) presiding. resent: Senators Johnson of Colorado, Hunt, and Bricker. lso present: E. R. Jelsma, staff director of Subcommittee on mestic Land and Water Transportation. 'he CHAIRMAN. Mr. Giles Morrow. TEMENT OF GILES MORROW, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY AND GENERAL COUNSEL, FREIGHT FORWARDERS INSTITUTE Mr. MORROW. Mr. Chairman, I come now to bill S. 2713, to provide e definite standards for exemption from part IV of the act. Bill S. 2713 is of vital concern to the freight forwarding industry, the need for its prompt passage is of the utmost urgency. The ustry unanimously and earnestly recommends favorable action on bill. The bill is in conformity with recommendations of the Interstate mmerce Commission. do not mean to say that the ICC has drafted the language of the or necessarily approves the language of the bill. The Commishas yet to testify on the bill, and we hope if it is not in all respects ded as they would like to see it, they make suggestions for changes. m sure that we can all go along with any reasonable changes the mmission may suggest. t has been endorsed by the American Trucking Associations. I lerstand that the union which represents forwarder employees ports the bill. It has not been objected to by the railroads. n fact this bill is so fully in accord with the basic intent and poses of the regulation of transportation that it is difficult to lerstand how anyone could oppose its passage. Opposition could ically be based only on a mistaken concept of what the bill does, 1 that is why I wish to carefully explain the terms and purposes he proposed legislation. Section 402 (c) of the act exempts from regulation the operations shippers' associations and shippers' agents, under specified conions. The bill does not change that section. However, the bill Is a new subparagraph to section 402 (c), setting up standards determining who is entitled to the exemption and authorizing Interstate Commerce Commission, under prescribed conditions, remove the exemption. I will discuss those standards more fully a moment. Essentially, the bill sets up procedures for drawing a line between rier and noncarrier activities-a line that has become very loose ragged through lack of standards. It differentiates between vice which should be regulated, in the public interest, and that ich should not be regulated. As this committee knows, it is not ays easy, even in the case of physical carriers, to define where ulation should begin and end. In the case of indirect carriers h as forwarders, it has become clear that a precise line cannot be |