The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-12-23
A POSITIVE STAND TAKEN
Objections of Louisville Board of Trade
Considered and Answered.
POWER OF THE INTER- STATE COMMISSION
The Opposition of the Louisville Board Involves
the Very Existence Of the Inter- State
Commerce Commission
Itself.
Wilmington. N. c., Dec. 10.

ttS6lIs
Wilmington, N. c., Dec. 10, 1900
The Wilmington Chamber of Commerce
through a special committee appointed
for that purpose, has prepared a report
on the "Cullom Bill" that is so excellent
the exponent of just railroad regulation,
in order to insure for it wide reading.
The report is as follows:
70 The Chamber of Commerce:
Your committee to whom was referred
the communication from the Louisville
Board of Trade. asking the occurrence
of this oody in opposition to the "Cullon,
Bill beg leave to submit the following
rerort:
We have not thought It necessary TO go
:nto an extended discu Ss,aa OF the merits
Of the proposed bill. TIE matter has been
thoroughly considered by the Chamber
within a year, and a report by Mr.. j. AL
len Taylor, recommending the passage of
the bill was adopted. The chief objection
to the bill which is now mentioned by thes
Louisville Board of Trade, was then pre-
sented by Mr. Taylor, but the necessity
of some radical legislation, such as en-
bodied in the Cullom Bill, extending and
enlarging the powers of the Interstate
Commerce Commission seemed to be so
pressing that it was thought best to over
look several possible objections and re-
commend the adoption of the bill as a
whole rather than that there should seem
to be any division among commercial or
CARNATIONS on this all-important ques-
ton
The communication from the Louisville
Board of Trade calls attention. very prob
ably to every possible objection to the
bill. These objections are presented in
such terms as to cause them to appear
unduly important, and we believe that any
one who is desirious of continuing the ex-
istence of the Interstate Commerce Com
mission, and who will weigh the obiec-
tions carefully. can but come to the con-
clusion that they are of much less consc-
quence than the Louisville Board would
make them appear.
We were so fully persuaded that prac-
tically the entire commercial interests
of this country admitted the necessity of
the extension and enlargement of the
powers of the Interstate Commerce Com
mission, that the closing statement of the
Louisville Board that the proposed leg
islation is ill-considered and unneces-
sary;" together with the fact that some
of the objections presented. seem to be of
such insignificance, while made to appear
all-important; and the additional cir
cumstance that there is not word of
commentator even for those portions of
the bill which all could advocate. but it's
unconditional rejection is urged; cause
us reluctantly to adopt the conclusion
that some influence not entirely in SYM
pathy with the interests of the patrons
of transportation lines, is agitating what
seems to be a concerted opposition to the
bill
The first objection urged by the Louis
vile Board in regard to the proposed
amendment to the Tong and short haul
clause" of the Interstate Commerce Law
is doubtless worthy of careful considera-
ton and has some weight.
However, the decision of the United
States Supreme court in the Social Circle
Case, is a bar to the arbitrary enforce
ment of the clause. and there is no reason
to believe that the Commission would
ignore competitive conditions in respect
of water competition.
There is no question but that cases do
exist and may hereafter arise where it
would be unwise to make it imperative
for transportation companies to charge
no greater compensation for shorter
than long distance over the same line.
But the bill provides that the Commission
shall be empowered to suspend the rules
in special cases, and we are forced to be-
lieve it is much better that this power to
suspend should be given to the Commits
sion rather than left to the whim of the
freight agent of the transportation COM
pany.
The second contention of the Louisville
Board is that transportation companies
should not be prohibited from changing
tariffs. except upon sixty days notice, but
that they should be permitted to change
their rates at any time when the exigen- |
cies of competition seem to demand it.
So far from this sixty day provision be-
ing Objectionable, it is quite the reverse.
All TRANSFORMATION lines are equal before |
the law, and a cut rate by one line would |
subject the offender to a very heavy pen |
atty. which the law makes positive and |
continuous should the violation continue. |
The contention therefore. that an hon
estly disposed line would be made to SUI |
fer is not tenable and is utterly without |
force. Sudden and radical changes are |
ono of the evils of traffic conditions, and ,