Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-01-24

Twenty.nins stssss in the Union have Is.s more
or less stringent for the regulation Of railroads;
eoven statcs empower their commisetoners-
generally three 70 mako OF originate rates
and twelve % revise rAsee
said against This bill because u Originally en-.
powered tho commissioners 70 MAKE rate:
rather than 70 revise them. Tho prsctlcai
difference In the power 70 make sna ne power
dIedum and "twecdledee." A commisuaon can
moro oasliy revise . tsri6 out VI existence than
IL can originate Q new tarih. Nearly AL the
originate fates; some Of the southern States she
power to make and some tho power 70 rovise;
the great States OF Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota,
Wiscopsin, Indiana, and California nave the
states thero Is no appeal from the decisions OF
the commissioners
THE EEsr-BILL APPEAL CLAUSE
Tho Supreme Court OF tho United states has
decided that this arbitrary and lslp power given
70 the commissioners Is unconstitutional. but tho
the courts after full and fair hearing before
the commission, and this wise provision prngs
tho bill within tho decisions OF tho supreme
Court The commissioners In rortn Caroiino
have the power TO mako or originate rates; Soutn
Carolina, Mississippi, aud Alabama empower
cir commissioners 70 make or revise rates; the
Empire state OF Georgia Is more conspicuous
than any other OF the southern tier OF states ior
az general prosperity aud Its vast railroad de-
yolopment. IL has excited the Jealousy ana
enyy IN this respect OF virginia and its other
sister States. Georgia has the most stringent
railroad law OF any State In the Union. TIC
new Constitution OF that State, adopted soon
after tho war, provided Tor the regulation OF
railroads. The railroad act, enacted Ia 1Sis-lg.
empowers the commissioners TO make and orig''
nate rates.
Mr. tucker asked that the committee bear In
mind that the Georgia railroad law was tho most
stringent railroad law in the Union. The reports
Of the Railroad Commission OF Georgia Tor 1871
and 1891 show that Georgia Is stu in the lcad IN
tho building Of new railroads and In the now,
mileage laid. As compared with Virginia from
January TO October ], 1890. there were Twelve
new lines In Georgia 70 eight in virginia, ana
323 miles OF track laid In Georgia TO 13d In VIZ
ginia. Compared with thirty-nine states IN tue
Union, Georgia is slightly behind three states
only and In respect TO the track laid for the same
period Is ahead OF any other State.
MIR. Tucker did not pretend TO say tnet tne
Georgia railroad law was the cause Of the gene
raj prosperity.and vast railroad deveiopmehts IN
that State: but he insisted that the facts citeo
demonstrated that the railroad law OF Georgia,
stringent M IT WAS. did not check the prosperity
and railroad development IN State. The same
nigh. be said Of the great northwestern o.a.es,
to which reference has been made. Inesc ia.,er
States have been bellies, as II were. III the
race for prosperity and railroad Development
between the whole slsterho0d Of states. AS 10
the state OF Georgia, II has been assorted IN
and elsewhere that is susceptible OF proc, snas
-
per cent. higher than obtained IN virginia.
Mr.. Tucker SAID that he DID not Know.
but he believed this TO De true. II "
Is true 1t is an unanswerapie argunents " MI
assertion of the railroad managers ana their
allies that such laws a. that now proposeu 10 pe
enacted in Virginia will result In the reduction
of the average rate-charge or revenue OF Inc
railroad.
CONFLICTING RAILROAD ARGUMENTS.
Tho railroad managers and their allies seem
nd
arguments against such legislation as IL now
proposed. They say 70 the capitalists anu "
the class who have no use for Transportation OF
freight that such railroad Legislation VII 80 49, re-
ducs the revenues Of the railroads arising iroiii
their rate-charge that they will be crippled anu
ruined, and that therefore, Investors WIZ not
bring their money here; on the otber manu-,
when addressing themselves 70 'no s sun.,a'
shipper or transporter they say that the average
rate-chargs will be raised and increased. Ihese
two FSuments cannot be reconciied, mo iaci
ia that the prosperity and railroad ueVeiop-
ment in State IL dependent upon other causes
than the mere enactment OF law TO regulate
Mr.. Tucker here asked 10 be permitted to
read extracts from the report OF @ yDi,
missions in the different States OF TINS Union
showing their experience and observation IN re-
spect TO laws similar to that nov proposed In
Virginia. a.
following Is taken from the report OF the Mis-
souri, Commission, composed OF three gentle
men: 4,
at will be remembered that In our last re-
mort we analyzed tho provisions OF our law In
respect 20 the matter OF rates, explained their
operation, pointed out their defects, ana recon-
mended certain specified amendments intended
10 supply their deficiencies and increase the Oh
fectiyeness OF their operation, which amend
ments we're adopted by your Exceilcncy and
urged upon the attention OF the General As
sembly in your message 70 that body with
the most cogent reasons In favor OF
their adoption. 1t t1ercrorc gives us much
pleasure to be- able to state now that We see no
valid reason for changing our opinion In regard
10 the desrability of these amendments. On the
contrary, the discussions thai have since taken
place In our own and In other legislatures, and
In the public press, have proved that not only our
theory of State supervision Of railroad trans
portation is correct but that the trend OF pubic
opinion all over the country Is decidedly In the
same direction. Several additional States have
created railroad commissions for the very pnr-
pose of regulating rates, and without any direct
and specified authority have been moving to
wards the point OF adding this authority TO tee
other duties OF their commissioners. Tho ind.
cations are very plain that In the near future
NOT only will there be a railroad commission with
specific authority In regard TO rates OF trans