The pioneer press. (Miller, Hand County, S.D.) 1893-190?, 1895-10-10

STEVENSON rate case" reversing the
action of the railroad and warehouse
commission. The principal reason for
the reversal is that the rate fixed by
the commission is not reasonable.
The facts involved in this long pend
ing case are reasonably familiar to the
public. In brief they are that Elias
Stevenson. a citizen of Polk county.
began proceedings i'm 1894 before the
railroad and warehouse commission,
alleging that the freight charges OF
h Great Northern on grain from
East Grand Forks, Fisher and Crooks
ton, respectively, to Minneapolis and
Duluth were excessive and cas-
able. The commission heard the case
and fixed the rate which the road
should charge for grain. The commits
sion's rate applied to the entire state,
based on a rate per hundred pounds
per mile in sections Of five miles. The
rate fixed was: For ) miles and IN
der, 4 cents; for 5 miles and not ex-
ceeding 10 miles. 4.25 cents; over 10
miles and not exceeding IL miles, 4.5
cents, and so on up to 400 miles. Tho
railroad company appealed to the dis
trict court, and alleged that prior rates
were reasOna BILE. that the rate fixed by
the commission was too low. and that
the commission had exceeded it's au-
thority in establishing rates all over
the state instead Of between the speci-
fed stations mentioned in Mr.. Steener-
sons complaint.
Judge Kerr's findings OF fact and his
memorandum Of opinion on the appeal
comprises a document of forty-eight
type written pages. and Is quite ex-
haustive. The principal points i'm his
findings may be stated to be:
The Great Northern and Northern
Pacific are competing and parallel
lines between the stations named. and
a law Of commerce DEGREES that rates
on such roads between terminal points
must be substantially the same. The
distance from Red river points to Min
neapoliS is substantially the same on
both roads. but from Red river points
to Duluth is about siXty-iiye miles less
by the Northern Pacific. Therefore. on
a mileage basis the Great Northern
would he compelled 70 surrender the
Duluth business to its rival. which re-
| duirement would be unreasonable I'M
der the circumstances. and. therefore,
illegal. The court gives at length the
history OF the building of the Great
| Northern and it's cost as testified to
before him. and says that ii is very
difficult to determine the present value
Of the road and its equipment. 1t is
important to settle this. because the
law may not deprive the owner OF
property of a fair return of profit upon
it's value. He then attempts To arrive
at an approximate value by determin-
ing the present cost of It's reproduc-
/ tinn Urn yappn1ncn Tho Iinnc Of fhn
Manitoba, or Great Northern. in Min
nesota. and it's terminal facilities, the
court fixes S44,OO0,O 600 as Il reasonable
estimate.
The court then details the items or
the fixed charges and goes into diff
cult problems Of a%pportioning to the
Minnesota portion of the road the
earnings of the road on it's interstate
traffic. After complicated mathemat-
zeal computations the net earnings in
Minnesota for 1894 is estimated at
$So2,416. The gross and net earnings
of the entire road as computed, and
Judge Kerr demonstrates that the
rates fixed by the commission would
result in depriving the railroad com
| pany Of the income from its business
| to which it is entitled.
In concluding his findings Judge
Kerr says: ''1he reduction Of rates
| proposed by the commission, applied
to the Northern Pacific company,
would serve simply to aggravate the
| strained condition of it's finances and
sink it deeper into insolvency, but un-
der the theory adopted by the court of
a fair income upon actual value. Hin
result as applied TO the W. companies
would not he materially different. ex-
cept as effected by the shorter haul on
the Northern Pacific road to Duluth.
If capitalized only to the extent of PIE
cost of its reproduction i'm he State Of
Minnesota, the Northern Pacific could
not, any more than the Great North
crn, afford to haul grain between the
points named mt the rates fixed by the
commission"
In a very lengthy but clear memo
randum of opinion Judge Kerr says,
speaking of determining reasonable
rates: 1T Is difficult to conceive OF a
problem more intricate and involving
more matters which must be taken
into consideration before n satisfac-
tory answer can be reached" . 8
The concluding ,hapter of the men,
orandum says: "At the close Of n
difficult task il has been my duty to
perform ! give expression to the feel
ing present with me throughout the
trial that any decision which l may
make is likely to be Of little practical
utility: it simply passes upon the val
idity of dn order made a yeas ago. 1t
does not prevent, and should not deter
the commission from making Mt once
another essentially similar order il
present circumstances would justify
II. The reasonableness. of a rate
changes with changed conditions and
circumstances. that which would be
fair and reasonable to-day six months
or a wear hence may be too high or
too low. and so that which may have
been an unrcasonably low rate ut the
time of the commissioners order nav