Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-09-03
Report of the Georgia Railroad Com
InissiOn-SuggestiOn About Amend


AtEdnt1 Constitution.
The commissioners have always thought
that as few changes as was considered con-
sistent with the public interest should be
made in the schedule of rates provided for
the railroads OF the State. We have felt that
stability in rates was an important feature TO
De considered. In prescribing schedules and
making changes therein we have ever kept
this important feature in view. This accounts
sufficiently for the very few circulars chang
ing rates that the commission has found 1t
necessary to make since the date of our last
report. Many questions arising out Of the
varied interests of the railroads and the
people have been presented to the COM
mission for its decision. In most OF these
cases, however, we have not found it necessary
or proper to order changes of rates. In all
such cases we have not published the action
of the commission. We have frequently
been called upon by the people of other states
as well az of our own State for information in
reference to our action and its results in the
light of experience. Whatever we have done
is shown by the records and papers OF this
office, which are ALWAYS open TO inspection
and to which we respectfully invite your Ex-
cellency's attention.
Complaints have frequently been made that
the right of appeal to the courts does not lie
from the decisions and rulings Of the commits
sion. This has, in some instances, been made
a pretext for assailing the commission ITSELF
1t has been claimed that the decisions of the
commission were autOcratc and that the great
interests of the railroad companies of the
state were placed by the law in the hands of
an irresponsible tribunal. We hardly think it
necessary to call your EXcellency's attention
to the errOneOusuess of such claim. So far
as the commissioners themselves are con-
cerned, as far back as May, 1881, in a report,
then submitted by the Governor of the State,
they took occasion to call attention to this
subject. They then felt, as they still feel,
that the want of the right of direct appeal
from their decisions greatly increased their
responsibility. Acting upon this conviction
they have been ever careful to so regulate
their conduct in all cases as to do no injustice
either to the railroads or to the public.
We would not be understood, however, as
intending to admit that the right to have the
decisions of the commission reviewed by the
courts does not exist under the law. Any de-
cisiOn made by this commission, which does
injustice to any party, may be reviewed by
We have always thought that parties claim
ing to be injured by a ruling of this commits
sion might, under the law as it now stands,
have a remedy in the courts. But this RENE
DIP, as the law now stands, is not easily avail
able. Hence we have favored and still favor
such a change in the law as would authorize
direct appeal to the courts from the decision
of the commission. But any law authorizing
such change. should be so guarded in its pro-
visions as not to impair the usefulness of the
commission to the public.
While a complaining party ought to have
the right of appeal, he should not be left at
liberty to indefinitely suspend the action Of
the commission by frivolous and wanten
exercise of that right. Persons familiar with
cases may be continued from term to term,
and how frequently such cOntinuances result
IN gross injustice In the matter under con-
sideration such an evil should be strictly
guarded against. Impressed with the i'm
pOrtanee of this we do not hesitate to recon-
mend that a supersedeas Of our decisions
should not be worked by any appeal which may
be given, The reasOnableness of this view is
sufficiently pointed ont in the extracts which
we have submitted. We 10 not think that
great injustice would result from short de-
lay in the enforcement Of the commissioners
rulings. Under the law as it now stands
we are required to publish for q certain pc
riOd any schedule of rates adopted by
the commission, and pending such publiea-
tiOn such schedule is not of force. The period
required for such publication would, in most
instances, be sufficient to enable the party
to have his cause adjudicated by
the courts. With proper legal provisions for
prompt action and speedy hearing before the
court, we see no reason why the right of ap-
peal should not be given, so that COM
planning parties, whether railroads, individ-
ual citizens or communities might be allowed
to enjoy a highly valued constitutional PRIV
ilege, while the public interest would not
necessarily suffer thereby. But we desire to
press upon your EXcellency the very great
Of having such appeals finally de-
cIded within the shortest period Of time con-
sistent with justice TO the parties. 1t has been
the practice of the commissioners to provide
that their orders requiring publication
shall not go into Operation short Of thirty 1907
days after their adopfian. Experience has
shown to US the wisdom - this practice. This
period Of time we think 6tfieient to secure to
appealing parties tfeig gl7lts in the courts.
We would therefore RESPECTFULLY suggest
that any amendment Of the law giving the
right of appeal from the decision Of the com
mission shOuld be so guarded as not to allow
a suspension Of the action Of the commission
for period longer than thirty days. We do
not venture 10 suggest all the special provis-
ions which w0Hld necessarily enter into legis-
lation on this subject. We deem it sufficient
that we should very clearly indicate to your
Excellency cur opinion as TO the propriety of
giving the right Of appeal to the courts, and
the necessity of incorporating into the law
provisions guarding the public against the
evils which might possibly result from any
attempt to abuse the privilege.