Under the present law stock is often ten or more hours longer without food than it would be if there was no restriction whatever, and is also subjected to an extra unloading and loading.

"As practical shippers we have found, in the case of sheep coming from Idaho to the slaughtering markets, that the shrinkage under the enforcement of the law is on an average 2 pounds or over to the head more than it was when we were allowed to use our judgment as to the time and place of providing food, water, and rest.

"There is always some shrinkage where wild or semiwild animals are handled, and oftentimes the shrinkage of 2 additional pounds will cause mutton to be graded as second, where it would otherwise be first quality. The shipper then not only sustains the loss of the actual shrinkage, but perhaps 25 or 50 cents per hundred pounds on the whole carcass.

"The shipments of sheep from the State of Idaho alone in 1905 up to December 1 consisted of 5,500 cars, or about 1,650,000 sheep. A very conservative estimate of the loss caused by the present law is 15 cents per head, amounting for that one State to $247,000. This is a loss from which no one receives any benefit. This illustration is applicable to all the South and West of this country, and to a greater or less degree to all kinds of live stock.

"The restrictions of the law have generally been interpreted to refer only to the time in transit and not to the time consumed in loading and unloading; yet, at times the construction has been otherwise. The definite expression of this bill will make conditions uniform without material change, as in the loading of large shipments where any considerable time is consumed a part of the stock is usually on feed while the rest is being loaded, and the same is true in unloading.

"The provision to allow sheep to continue in transit until daylight, when the time limit expires at night, is particularly recommended, as it is impossible to unload them in darkness without inflicting great abuse, and even after being unloaded they will neither eat nor drink readily in the night. Since they lie down in the cars at their will the question of rest is practically eliminated. "In cases where the carrier furnishes food this bill provides a simple and convenient means for collecting the pay for the same, whereas the present law in cases of forced collection would greatly inconvenience the carrier in many localities. The provision allowing a shipper to furnish his own feed will enable him to secure that best adapted to his purpose at reasonable rates.

"The last clause of section 3, which exempts shipments from being unloaded where food, water, and room for rest are provided in cars, will encourage railroad companies to provide cars properly equipped. "Section 5, relative to the minimum speed limit of trains, we feel will be beneficial to the shipper and at the same time work no hardship on the railroads. This limit of 16 miles per hour is less than any road has been willing to promise when we have conversed with them on this subject. It will tend to bring about uniformity and a condition upon which calculations can be based that in the end will result in benefit to both the stockmen and railroads.

Respectfully submitted.

"F. W. GOODING.

"P. G. JOHNSTON.
"W. H. PHILBRICK."

Mr. TOWNSEND. You spoke, and Judge Cowan also spoke, of the loss of weight, shrinkage. Does that indicate any cruelty or that the animal has suffered?

Mr. PHILBRICK. I will state in answer to that question that there is nothing that reduces the weight more with timid animals than affecting their nerves. I was talking just recently with a man from Michigan who is a sheep raiser, and he had a flock of sheep divided in three pastures, and in one of those pastures a dog chased the sheep for ten or fifteen minutes. The dog did not actually touch one of the sheep. This occurred in February, and between then and the time of the next shearing, in June, one-half of that flock of sheep died. They gradually pined away from the nervous shock. That is one illustration that makes conclusive in my mind the fact that the worry to the animals is the greatest cause of shrinkage.

Mr. RICHARDSON. I do not know whether you commented on section 3 of this act. I believe you did not.

Mr. PHILBRICK. I referred to the last clause of that section.

Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes; section 3 of the act provides for the penalties if the railroads do not comply with all the requirements of the statute, and then the proviso is that when the animals are carried in cars where they can get food, water, and space they are not required to be unloaded. Who determines that?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Who determines whether the cars are of that character?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Who determines whether the cattle are so situated in the cars that they can get along, that they have space and have water, and food can be given them. Who settles that question as to whether they shall be unloaded or not, under this law?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Well, I should suppose that if it could not be agreed upon between the shipper and the railroad, it would have to be taken into the court.

Mr. RICHARDSON. There, you see, in that proviso you wipe out_all the provisions of the law. I understood Judge Cowan to say that the thicker you put cattle in a car the better it was for them, because they could not lie down; and that if you undertook to water them in a car it made the car very slippery, so that it was dangerous to the cattle; and yet your proviso is that if they have space enough in that car so that they can feed and water them they can go on and do it and not incur any of the penalties of the law. I would like to have you explain that provision to the committee and tell us what you mean by that.

Mr. PHILBRICK. This clause is intended to cover the cars that are known as palace stock cars.

Mr. RICHARDSON. But it does not say so.

Mr. FRENCH. That is simply a copy of the law at the present time. Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes.

Mr. FRENCH. We would be glad to modify that.

Mr. RICHARDSON. But you leave it open to a very different construction from what you are giving it.

Mr. PHILBRICK. There are stock cars many of them provided so that cattle can not slip or anything of that sort, and for the shipment of race horses; and all those things have been expressed carefully.

Mr. Escн. Can sheep stand confinement in cars better and longer than cattle or horses?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes, sir. I may state that sheep are different in their habits from horses and cattle. In the first place, they are light animals, and if a sheep lies down and another one steps on him it does not injure him particularly. He is protected, practically, by his coat of wool. In shipments we will notice that after the sheep have been on the road a few hours perhaps one-third of them will be lying down in the car. The ones standing up suffer no inconvenience, nor do the ones lying down. Perhaps at the next stop that we will make some of those sheep that were lying down will get on their feet and others will lie down, so that the sheep practically rest whenever they choose on the cars.

Mr. Escн. So that there is no bruising, so far as sheep are concerned, except such as may be entailed by driving them in and out of the cars?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes, sir. Sheep are perhaps more timid to handle than any other kind of live stock. That has been my experience, and I ship all classes of stock.

Mr. Escн. You have to use more force to get them in and out of cars than you do with cattle?

Mr. PHILBRICK. No, sir; but you should use more tact. When you commence using force with sheep you do not get ahead very fast. Mr. Escн. You have range sheep, and they are more timid than our eastern variety?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes; very much.

Mr. ESCH. You have to force them more?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes, sir; we have to impose on their timidity

more.

Mr. WANGER. Do you personally accompany your shipments?

Mr. PHILBRICK. I have done it a great deal. I was over the road twice last year.

Mr. WANGER. What inconvenience have you observed from the operation of the present law?

Mr. PHILBRICK. At times we have been obliged to unload at points where it was impossible to get any suitable feed and water. That was the case with sheep, particularly because our sheep that are accustomed to drinking only out of brooks do not understand about going to troughs, even when they are provided; and if there is not a good deal of room they will not take advantage of food and water. When we are compelled to unload at a desert place, where there is neither of those requirements, we have, under this law, to remain five hours. Then we load up and proceed to the first place where there is a proper arrangement, and there we unload for the sake of giving the animals what they need and what they must have, to protect them, so far as we can.

Mr. WANGER. You would like to be exempted from the necessity of the first unloading to which you refer?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes. If we had a flexible law that would allow us to go on in our discretion to a suitable point, we could avoid one unloading, one handling of the sheep, and the sheep would actually be benefited, or the cattle, or whatever animals were being shipped. I was just talking about sheep at the time. They can be put on feed several hours sooner than they can if we have to unload just to comply with the law at some point where we can not get any of those advantages.

Mr. SHERMAN. I move that the committee take a recess until 10.30 o'clock to-morrow morning for the consideration of the rate bill. (The motion was carried.)

Mr. MANN. I move that a subcommittee of three be appointed to continue the hearings on these various bills about the twenty-eight hour law.

The CHAIRMAN. It is moved that a subcommittee of three be appointed to continue to take the testimony that may be offered upon these various bills that we have been considering this morning. (The motion was carried.)

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will consist of Mr. Mann, Mr. Stevens, and Mr. Russell.

(Thereupon, at 12 o'clock m., the committee adjourned.)

SUBCOMMITTEE INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE,

Tuesday, January 23, 1906.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to the taking of recess, at 2 o'clock p. m., Hon. James R. Mann in the chair.

Mr. MANN. Gentlemen, you may proceed in such order as you wish. Did Mr. Philbrick finish his testimony this morning?

Mr. PHILBRICK. I would like to add a few words to what I have said.

Mr. MANN. You may proceed.

STATEMENT OF MR. W. H. PHILBRICK-Continued.

Mr. PHILBRICK. There was one point I was talking of when the committee took a recess, and that was as to whether the handling of the sheep or cattle or live stock affected the shrinkage. I want to say that my experience all along that line has been that anything that disturbs the condition of the mind of the animal is detrimental to his condition.

Mr. STEVENS. In what way?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Well, he does not gain. To illustrate, there is no instruction that we give to a herder on the range- -a cattle herder or a sheep herder-with more force or more explicitly than we instruct him to handle the stock gently; not unnecessarily excite them; to take any necessary amount of time and not worry them. Take it, for instance, with sheep. They are a timid animal. On the range you never have to use brutal force with sheep. You handle him from the time he is born until he goes to the market from the instinctive fear that he has in his nature. If we find a herder who is cruel with sheep we dispense with his services. We use dogs for the herding of sheep. If a dog really attacks a sheep he is entirely worthless to us. He is disposed of; he is killed or given away, or taken away from the sheep immediately. So that in that respect that part is almost out of the question while we are on the range. But we attempt to handle him gently; and we sustain losses in numbers every year from allowing them their own way-letting them scatter on the ranges so

as not to disturb them, so as to not upset the quietude of their mindsin order to let them get in the best condition possible. And there is nothing that affects the flesh of an animal more than the disturbing of his mind, making him restless and uneasy, and treating him unhumanely, you may say.

Mr. MANN. How does that affect the question of the extension of time?

Mr. PHILBRICK. The reason that the extension of time is asked for is because oftentimes when there are no suitable places for feeding and watering, et cetera, we are obliged to unload a load of these animals and are obliged to use more or less force at that time and disturb them from their quiet condition, and in that way it causes a shrinkage which affects their condition when they are on the market.

Mr. BURKE. Do sheep ever lie down when they are being transported on the cars, or do they remain standing, as cattle do, as a rule? Mr. PHILBRICK. They lie down. There will be a percentage that will not lie down. I explained that this morning; some lie down for a while, and then they will get up and others will lie down. There is nothing to interfere with their resting as much as they like in transit.

There are things, perhaps, that I will not think of to present unless I am asked questions.

Mr. ESCH. With reference to the maintenance of the schedule of the speed, do you think you could make a speed schedule on those mountain roads with any certainty?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Different roads would have to vary considerably, I think.

Mr. ESCH. Would that be an argument for an extension of time? Mr. PHILBRICK. Well, in some cases, yes; I should think so.

Mr. STEVENS. I suppose it is an argument for extension of time that traffic is congested in centers like Omaha and Kansas City and Chicago general freight and passenger traffic?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes; there are times when that occurs.

Mr. STEVENS. That makes considerable delay?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Yes, sir.

Mr. BURKE. In shipping sheep do you hay the cars, as they often do in shipping cattle?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Well, that is done sometimes, but not always done; it depends on the class of sheep we are shipping and the time of the year, and so on. You take sheep right off of grass in the summer time, when it is warm, and they would make very little use of any hay you might put in the cars; they would hardly touch it; they would go on a long time before they would eat any of it. At another time, in the winter time, in shipping sheep that had been accustomed to feed, they will take advantage of hay that is placed in the cars.

Mr. BURKE. How do sheep compare with cattle as to the length of time that they will go without water without suffering?

Mr. PHILBRICK. Well, sheep naturally would go a good deal longer without water than any other kind of domestic live stock. They will oftentimes on the range go many days, and even weeks, without drinking when they have an opportunity to drink. They have an opportunity every day or every two days, and they do not seem to require the water. That is when the grass is green.