The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-12-31
AS TO RAILWAY TARIFFS
SHOULD CONGRESS- LEGIsLATE WITH
A VIEW TO THEIR REGULATIONS
Discussion of an Important Question
by AIdace f. Walker, of the Atch-
isOn, Topeka & Santa Fe.

In discussing the question Should Con-
gress legislate on the subject of railway
rates?" Chairman Aldace F. Walker, of the
Atchison, Topeka e Santa Fe Railway
Company, considers the following three
phases of the subject:
First-That of constitutional right.
Second-That of practical common sense.
Third-The demand for additional power in
this direction in the last report of the In
tersNate-commerce Commission.
In touching on the question of constitu-
tional right to legislate on railway rates Mr..
thorities and endeavors to bring the decision
back to it's original meaning, eliminating
every consideration save the naked defni-
ton of the phrase "What is it to regulate
commerce." This clause. Mr.. Walker con-
tends, must be construed so as to harmonize
with the fifth amendment, which restricts
the powers of Congress, much as the powers
of states are restricted by the fourteenth
amendment. In regulating the subjects of
Interstate and foreign commerce we may
concede a right to promote the exchange of
commodities, when deemed desirable for the
common good, and to suppress the exchange
of such as are dangerous to life, health or
the general prosperity, but not to forbid
traffic in legitimate property, such as the
necessaries of life, it's comforts and it's lux
uries. In regulating the persons engaged
in commerce we may admit u right to exam
inc and license shipmasters. engineers, ETC.,
for the safety and protection of all con-
cerned, but not to exclude any citizen or
designated class of citizens from the pur-
chase of a seaworthy ship, or of wagons, or
railroads, or their employment in commerce.
In regulating the instruments OF commerce
we may allow the existence of power to
supervise the physical operation of vessels,
railway trains, etc; to see to it that brakes
are continuous, ship boilers safe and life
boats ample. But when we come to the mat
ter of contracting for services to be rendered
we find that property, by the fifth and md
ment is asa sacred as life and liberty, and
that any common carrier rendering his ia
cilities to the public may make his price
what he will, subject to his responsibility
in the courts for damages if he commits UNI
just discrimination or extortion.
The reasons given by Mr.. Walker for ques,-
tionng the power of Congress to prescribe
future maximum rates, enforceable by in
junction, may thus be epitomized:
First-No such power was contemplated
by the trainers of the Constitution.
Second-The Constitution has not yet been
SO construed by the Supreme Court.
Thlrd-The words regulate commerce" do
not imply its existence on any fair construc-
ton of their meaning.
Fourth-Such a construction would inter-
fere with and destroy the rights Of property,
assured by other clauses
Fitth-The clause cannot be so construed
without Involving the power to regulate the
rates to be charged by vessels engaged in
commerce with foreign nations and also
prices generally in commercial transactions
is 1T DESIRABLE OR WISE?
The practical side of the subject is then
taken up and the pertinent question asked:
Suppose Congress has the right to fix flu
ture railway rates upon interstate traffic,
is the exercise of such a power desirable
or wiser Mr.. Walker, in reply to this
question, calls attention to the fact that
If Congress can confer such power upon
a commission, it can exercise it directly by
act. TO see where this would lead us one
or two concrete cases out of thousands may
be suggested. Suppose member from
Georgia should introduce a bill to reduce
the rate on marble to 25. cents per hundred
pounds from points in Georgia to Chicago
and suppose, also, that the rate on ma rble
from Vermont to Chicago is 30 cents per
hundred pounds. The proposed reduction
would shut out Vermont marble from a
large part of it's present territory. New
England would naturally rally to the de-
Tense of Vermont, and the rate on marble
would become Il political issue, with local
ity arrayed against locality with bargains
to be made, with personal interests to he
promoted. Or, suppose, again, that the rate
on NUMBER from, Wisconsin and Michigan
points to Kansas and Nebraska should be-
come matter of congressional legislation,
as compared with lumber rates from Ar
kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oregon
to the same territory? Or SuppoSe a bill
should be introduced to prevent railroads
frcm transporting oranges from California
"a VOT ut InCof IRr,1 r,1
pounds, on the ground that such transpor-
tation has a tendency to injure the orange
growers OF Florida; or to reduce rates from
both states in order to exclude fruits from
others countries. Such examples need not
be multiplied There is no citizen who would
not deprecate the introduction of such ques-
tons into the halls of Congress. Neverthe-
less, such Legislative experiments are in
sight if we once concede the propriety of
congressional legislation upon railroad
rates. ittAe
Clearly we have here fundamental diff
culties in relation to the exercise of rate
making powers by Congress which would
seem to make such experiments both inn
practicable and dangerous Mr.. Walker next
calls attention to the fact that not only
at the time of passage, but the discussion
preceding the enaction of the Interstate
commerce. law clearly showed it was not the
intention OF Congress even indirectly to con-
fer such powers upon the commission Great
ed by the act of 1887. On the contrary the
prevalent idea then was that the fixing of
rates by legislation was impracticable. Quo
ing the bill positively state that lit would
be ineXpedient and impracticabe to attempt
to adjust existing inequalities by any sys-
tenn of rates established by legislation"
This proposition is subsequently developed
fully. 1t is as true to-day as it was ten
years ago.
Mr.. Walker next shows that after sew
eral years of laborious genesis the commits
sion has developed an idea that it has rate
making powers and, although the Supreme
Court has fully and finally decided that no
authority to nominate rates was conferred
on the commission by the interstate-com-
merce law, an effort is to be made to secure
legislation looking to this end. The new at
tack has begun by the clamor that the SUI
preme Court. by construction, has emascu-
lated the statute, and that Congress must
forthwith confer all the powers which the
court has said are not at present given.
To speak more concretely in relation to the
present subject, it is demanded that the
power to make rates be now conferred upon
the commission.
WHY SHOULD IT BE GIVEN?
But why? Let us look at the matter Sc
riously. What has occurred since 1887 to
make this proper legislation for Congress
to undertake? 1t was not then expedient
or practicable. Is it expedient or practi-
cable now? Have railway rates advanced
since 1887? Has extortion been committed?
Have we not the lowest rates in the world?
hof, aY1d