Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-12-29
DESTROYED by SUPREME COURT.
How Interstate Commerce Commits
sion Has Been Deprived OF Power.


(springfield (Mass) Daily Republican,
The annual report Of the Interstate
Commerce Commission reads like post
norton statement from.a defunct body on
the causes of it's demise. The commission
was created by Congress to administer
the laws of Congress respecting interstate
commerce. But the United States Su-
preme Court and other courts nave
stepped i'm and deprived the commission
of all real power.
The United States Supreme Court mas
denied to the commission power 10 nix
maximum rates. 1t has denied 10 the
commission power to prescribe rates vi
IN reduce rates or TO say in advance
what would be reasonable rates. 1t can
only inquire into wrongs done in the past
After a railroad has robbed some weaker
locality or shipper In behalf or some me-
tropolis or monopoly or trust the COM
mission can look into the matter put II
cannot prevent the roads from repeating
such acts OF aggression on public ana IN
dividual rights. "The commission can no
longer afford relief in particular cases
as it has in the past, for the Supreme
Court confines the commission to orders
in respect only of what has been done by
the carrier. Regulation governing iuture
rates is now unauthorized.
The United States courts have p'acti-
cally taken from the commission the
mower to enforce what few orders the
courts permit it to give, and &ve mus
brought the enforcement Of the law INTO
the hands of the courts, to be dragged
along though months. and even years OF
customary judicial delay. The courts have
thus brought the act of Congress regu-
lating interstate commerce down 70 about
this provision, to quote from the COM
missions report:
''If any citizen of the United States feels
that this law should be oDeyed, ne may
apply to the Circuit Court, and II that
court is of the opinion that it ought 10
have been enacted in the first instance IL
may enforce IT,"
But, shall the law of Congress, restrict
ing the acts of common carriers, and the
commission created to administer the
the law, stay scotched by the courts? the
commissions answer is OF course,
decided negative. 1t says:
The act to regulate commerce was pass
ed in obedience to popular demand ana
TO remedy admitted evils, and the ex-
perience of ten years has demonstrated
the necessity and justice OF such an act.
As that law has been interpreted there
can be no effective regulation or inter-
state carriers, anu IL lillS - 10 bcf ti-N
ACT must be amended. A tribunal, which
can stand for justice and fairness be-
tween these carriers and the people must
have power to fix a maximum rate, TO nix
a minimum rate in certain instances, and
it's orders must mean something. When
amended In these respe IT'S, Ii would not
have the strength II was originally under
stood to have, but it would possess some
force, and would be beginning TO which
additions could be made as necessity for
ihem might be developed
But how is the law-making power to do
all this against the power and disposition
OF the courts to undo 1t? The commission
says in it's report that "hndrances 10
regulation and checks upon enforcement
OF tie act have resulted largely, IL not
chiefly, from the discoveries and de-
cisions of the courts giving to the act an
Interpretation, contraT. TO the general
understanding OF its scope and purposes"
That is 10 say, the courts have deliberate
ly twisted the law away from its We'll
understood purposes. II the courts have
done that in the present cases. why may
they not give the same twist 1. the pro-
posed amendments TO the. law in cases
arising under the revised and strengthen
ed statutes?
The commission says that secret rates
ana unlaWIul DISCRIMINATION IN FAVOR OF
strong shippers and places and against
weak one are proceeding much as IL no
law existed. and particularly in the trunk
line territory; and IL is disposed TO favor
the legalizing OF railway pooling In the
nope that this would end the evil OF the
secret and cut rate. But the commission
says that II would be a little less than a
crime against the people OF the United
States to repeal the antl-pooling section
unless the commission or some other pub
lie tribunal were given power 20 regulate
pooling rates. But how r. Congress TO
confer such power on the commission
against the possible negative of the United
States courts?
The overshadowing power which the
| United States courts have beer asserting
TO themselves. and their manner OF exer-
| clslng II, have been of late a subject for
| frequent comment and no little denunaia.
| ton OF the Federal judiciary. and those
| who have ventured TO denOunce the .ourrs
| have generally been denounced In their
| turn as anarchists. But we should have
| 10 turn to the speeches OF Ex-Governor
| Altgeld or TO the Chicago platform makers
| to find more severe arraignmenf OF the
| Federal judiciary than Is contained In the
| quiet, temperate words OF this Interstate
| Commerce Commission report