The record-union., 1895-02-04

The RECORD UNION then, as now,
clearly perceived the contest which
would be waged over the control of this
body. If the customers of a dry goods
store had leagued together and appointed
committee of three to mark the goods
of the dry goods merchant it would not
have furnished more arbitrary instance
of the exercise of absolutism on the part
of the majority.
The Railroad Commission of California
in this just view of the situation had its
birth in an impulse of confscation. 1t is
a standing monument to the uninformed
and amateur craftsmanship which domi-
mated the convention. We saw clearly
then. as the fact is apparent now. that a
contest between the shipper and the car
rier for the control of the commission
would at once arise. When Mr.. Leeds
became the representative Of those mer-
chants OF San Francisco who had deter
mined upon the policy of destroying all
through points in the interior for the ben
eft of that city, he called their attention
to the powers of the Railroad Commits
sion and desired to know why they did
not have absolute control of that body.
The new Constitution had provided a
tribunal, which took the entire control of
rate-making out of the hands of railroad
corporations, and it was matter of
amazement to Mr.. Leeds that rates had
not been made by the shipper to suit
himself. He could not understand why,
in State which had appointed commits
sion with powers coordinate with those
exercised by the executive, judicial and
legislative departments Of the Govern
ment, there should be any complaint of
rates on the part Of the shipper.
In the meantime, however. the commits
sion had discovered that, notwithstand-
ing the extraordinary powers conferred
were still limited by the civilized concep-
ton of legislation and jurisprudence;
that, in short, the eternal principles of
right and justice had never been abol-
ished by the sandlot Constitutional Con-
vention. The right to regulate rates of
transportation exists in the States, and
the right to regulate interstate commerce
rests with the Government. The exist
ence of this right implies, sooner or later,
its exercise, and the question is: How
shall it be exercised? To abolish the
commission means to restore to the Leg
islature the power to regulate rates of
transportation, and that, in turn, means
that the railroads are to be present in
every caucus of every party, and that the
contention between the shipper and the
carrier is to be transferred from the Rail-
road Commission to the Legislature.
Whatever of progress has been made in
the deterioration of the public morals of
California had its beginning in the right
Of the Legislature to regulate freights and
fares. The political blackmailer found
his most profitable employment in the
introduction of bills regulating freight
charges. Bossism acquired its most gi-
gantic proportions and its most revolving
features in the period when the Legis-
lature had its right to regulate freights
and fares. The amateur craftsmanship
represented by the amateur journalism
OF California is now clamoring for the
abolition of the Railroad Commission.
In its expiring agonies the late San Fran
cisco Bulletin declared that the State
made a grievous mistake when it took
the power to regulate treights and fares
from the Legislature and the Governor
and put it in the hands of q commission.
This has some significance merely as q
deathbed confession, for the Bulletin was
one OF the most ardent supporters of the
extraordinary instrumentaIity OF regula-
ton by way of a commission with inde-
pendent coordinate powers. Recent de-
cisions of the Supreme Court of the
United states have practically shorn the
commission of all power OF confiscation
with which it was purposely invested.
Thus the ennobling spirit OF modern civ
ilization triumphed over the knavery
which devised the instrumentaIity and
divested it OF everything but its advisory
powers. The rates established by it are
not "conclusively just and reasonable"
bur may he inquired into by the courts.
It does not possess the power to confis-
cate or to arbitrarily limit the wealth
producing capacity OF the property OF
corporations. The property held by
corporation is held by tenure as sacred
as that which attaches 10 the ownership
OF property by individuals. Journalistic
and political knaves alone pretend to
perceive distinction between the right
of ownership by corporations and indi-
vidualg Such distinction is not appsr-
ent TO honest contemplation.
OUR evening contemporary devotes
over three columns of its space on Satur-
day to smirching all the citizens who at
tended the inaugural ball, because, as it
does not mention a single person cuiity