The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1884-12-24
Governor Stewart on Interstate
Commerce.

/
states, or, rather, for the regulation of
railway charges for the transportation
of merchandise between states-as
from Chicago to New York or Boston,
or from New York to New Orleans. As
we stated last week, Governor Stewart
has spoken upon this question and has
acquitted himself, as it was expected
he would do, with signal ability. He
promises to sustain in congress the
high rank acquired for the state by
Poland, Morrill, and Edmunds. The
regulation of the railway freight bust
ness between the states interests Yer
monters. Their state is traversed by a
railway that makes an important link
in one of the great through lines from
the West. Other lines that supply the
state with coal, flour and grain run into
the state, and the freight upon these
commodities is an important item in
the expense of living. In a general
way, the people are interested in this
matter. The regulation of interstate
traffic by congress is bound to come, and
the regulation of local traffic by the
states is sure to follow. In its local as
pect the discussion of the subject in
congress will have the greater interest.
The argument for national regulation
of interstate traffic applies with equal
force to state regulation of local traffic.
The speeches of Long, Stewart, Horn
and others, advocating commission,
apply directly to state regulation by
similar means, and present thorough
refutation of the sophistical arguments
of the senators who, at the recent ses-
sion of the legislature, opposed the rail-
way commission bill more in the spirit
of paid attorneys of the railways than
the servants of the people. Mr.. Stew
art said that there are one hundred
twenty-five thousand miles of railway
in this country, representing $1,000
600, 900 of money at the actual cash
value of the roads. When men come
to study and investigate the problem,
they will find serious difficulties in
volved in any attempt to regulate the
traffic of these roads by legislation.
Both methods proposed recognize the
necessity for remedial legislation to
correct existing abuses, and, as far as
may be, to overcome their liability to
recurrence. The duty of the carrier
may be expressed in simple sentence
His charges should be reasonable, and,
as between his customers, just and
equitable. The violation of this plain
principle furnishes the only just ground
of complaint. AS to the two methods,
the commission bill recognizes the ex-
istence of those natural principles of
commercial law which antedate stat
utes, and it undertakes to work with and
supplement them. On the other hand,
the substitute bill thrusts into this in
tricate problem artificial, arbitrary and
inflexible rules, not of universal appli-
cation, and which, in many cases,
would work the very mischief sought
to be remedied. Referring to the pro-
visions of the substitute bill which for
bid absolutely greater charge for
short than for a long haul, prohibiting
rebates, drawbacks and pools by prac-
teal illustrations, he showed, as did
Governor Long, the impracticability
and injustice of these cast-iron prohi-
billions. Coming to the consideration
of what he denominated the most i'm
portant feature of this bill, concerning
the objection that the commission "has
no power to do anything-that is to say,
tdoes not afford any remedy to the party
injured '-Governor Stewart said:
"Why, Mr.. Speaker, it is a remedy in adj
dition to all the remedies which the gentle
man affords in his bill. The party has the
same right to go into court in the commit
tees bill as in this bill. He is subjected to
not quite so severe penalties, but he is sub
jected to penalties in this bill for violation
of the general principles which we say
should govern railway managers. What is
the trouble? The gentleman says it is not
efficient enough; when you come to sum il
up, this commission has not power to render
a final Judgment and enforce its Judgment
by execution. That is the sum and sub
stance of the objection. Now both those
gentlemen are too good lawyers not to I'M
derstand that it is not in our power to create
such commission. We have given this
commission more powers than any railway
commission has ever had in this country;
we give them full power to investigate.
They are the ear Of the government, to listen
to complaint; they are the right hand of the
government, TO put in operation machinery
in favor OF the humblest and the weakest
citizen of this government who seeks re-
dress My friend from Pennsylvania COM
plains because the redress afforded is not
full and sufficient. 1t goes Just as far as
the law will allow it to go. Commissions
elsewhere in the states are clothed with no
judicial or executive power. They do not
render final judgment; they have no power
to make any peremptory orders. Such
commission is a board of investigation. a
board of inquiry and a board of advice, rep
resenting the sovereignty of the state as
this proposed commission would represent
the sovereignty OF sixty millions of people.
II is idle, Mr.. Speaker, for gentleman to
belittle the power and the influence of such
board rs this bill contemplates. Any
man who knows anything of the railway
management in this country, knows that
railway managers may be arrogant; great
power begets pride, and great power begets
arrogance; 1t is temptation to injustice,
And it is for that reason, Mr.. Speaker, that
1t has seemed to me wise, inasmuch as this
great power, this imperium in imperio, has