The Bottineau pioneer. (Bottineau, N.D.) 1885-1895, 1888-09-27
lmpsrtaat asilreaa Ds.isis,.

gne City railroad Ompany This cOn1p0nl
in June last notified the commissions tina
owing to the action Of competing lines cover
ing rates between Chicago 4 81. Paul AM
Minneapolis, 1t had been Obliged to reduc,
its own rates between these points below til,
rntes which it could afford to accept to in
termediate points, 10 that upon it's line ther,
would be greater charges made upon the short
or haul than upon the longer in the am,
direction. and 1t 10 stated that II complain,
should be made Of this, II would undertnk.
to justify its action under theinterstate com
rnerce law. This commission thereupon mad,
an order for a hearing to be held at Du
buque as which the company would be called
upon to justify its action and for public mott
fcation, 30 that other companies interested
and also any commercial organization OF
any other desiring to be heard, might havs
the opportunity. A hearing was according
~ had, and on the hearing the respond
emit company a gave evidence tendins
to show that the action it had taken wal
forced upon it by the Burlington & Northern
railroad company, which had made a rate
between Chicago, st. Paul and Minneapolis
below that which would be compensatory
and below what it was possible for any com,
peting lines to make without actual loss, and
it produced evidence tending strongly tic
show that the Burlington & Northern on the
rates it was making was not paying operat.
ing expenses.
The Burlington 4 Northern, 1t was con.
tended, was in constant violation of the in.
t~erstate low in making rates SO
low that neither itself nor it's rivals could &c.
cept them without . steady and destructive
drain upon their resources. The principal
question, therefore, raised before the com.
mission at the hearing was whether it had
the power to compel the Burlington & North.
ern to increase it's rates to q remunerative
point.
The commission disclaims possessing any
such power. 1t holds that congress, IN the
provision requiring all rates to Be reasonable
and just, was legislating for the protection OF
the general public, and not for the protection
ofrailroad companies against the action of
their OWN managers or against the unreasor.
able competition OF rivals, and that it was
never in the contemplation of congress that
it should be within the power of the commits.
sion to order an Increase in rates which,
in its opinion, ought to have been
made higher than they were. In this
respect it was supposed that the railroad
companies had ample remedies in their ow
hands, in the authority which they possess.
to make rates, and the protection needed
from the government was the protection OF
those who would he compelled to pay the
rates that should thus be made. Thu further
question was discussed whether the fact that
the Burlington 4 Northern made rates which
were unreasonably low made out the dis.
similar circumstances ind conditions under
the fourth section OF the act which would
entitle the respondent company to make a
greater charge on the shorter haul. The
respondent commended that if the com
mission could not control the making of de.
structively low rates the competition of rail.
roads which were subject to the act to.
regulate wasjust as harmful as the
competition of vessels or the competit ion oil
railroads not subject to the act, and there.
R~-~ ill., - a. - n
Northern ut the terminal points of respond.
ent's Dad established such dissimilar circum.
stances and conditions as justified its charg.
ing less at such terminnl points than at in.
termediate stations. The commits sion
does not assent to this view. The
showing of respondent is merely that a per.
verse rival makes unreasonably low rates
to the terInini OF it's road, but if this makes
out the dissimilar circumstances and condi.
tions intended by the fourth section of the
act, then any one railroad manager in the
Northwest may at pleasure, by q foolish
tariff sheet, give to one or more points OF
railroad competition q preference and adj
vantage over all others, and this would
defeat one of the leading purposes had in
viewin adopting the act, which was to put
an end to the discrimination which before
were so common between different locali-
ties. The act itself would there.
fore, as to one of it's leading pur.
poses, be dependent on the will of any single
railroad manager who, from policy or per
versity, might see fit to nullify it. The effect
of the doctrine commended for on the part OF
the respondent would be that railroad com
panies, ii they chose to do SO, may at will
build up a single point in the Northwest to
apreponderating and conclusive ascendency
at the expense Of oil others. Giving it rates
which in proportion would be q mere fraction
of what other localities must pay
might fix it's ~ascendency with little
regard to natural or other advantages. 1t
will not do to say that the rates to inter-
mediate stations ore just and fair in
and Of themselves. The question of what are
just and fair rates is always relative. Low
rates to one place may not be just and fair
If still lower rates are given to o rival. The
commission therefore finds and adjudges that
the transportation of freights by respondent
upon it's road from Chicago to St. Paul, Min
such Northern termini to Chicago is made
under substantially similar circumstances
and conditions to those under which like
freights are transported on the same line
from the same initial point OF points in. the
direction to intermediate stations, and
such being the case, that the greater charges
which respondent makes to such interfaediate
stations are illegal, an order will be entered
that respondent cease and dcsist from max
ing such illegal charges. Incidentally in dis
cussing the ease the commission says it does
not understand OF what ground the Burlirg-
ton & Northern, while insisting that it's rates
from Chicago to St. Paul are remunerative,
canjustify charging the same rates for one
third or two-thirds the distance. Upon it's
own showing those rates seem to be excessive.
The commission does not discuss the ques-
ton how far water transportation may justi-
fy~the greater charge on the shorter haul in
any case, there being In the case no facts to