The age-herald., 1901-08-14
from rates by a railroad com

suit rom rates py Idh oau SoAaAT mission.
 The pamphlet quotes at considerable length from reports of the Interstate Commerce Commission, The theories, however, advanced by that commission are simply the eX parte arguments or an ambitious tribunal which is extremely desirous of increasing its own power for it's own qualification. That commission by strained implication arrogated to it. self numerous important powers not con- ferred by the Interstate commerce act. When the Supreme Court of the United States declared that the commission had no such powers its members were very much offended, indulged in unbecoming criticisms of the Supreme Court and have steadily since that time bent their ener- gies to the end of obtaining from Con- gress the powers which, without author ity they had assumed to exercise The commission has for years past been con- ductlng an active campaign, preparing and circulating at the governments eX- pense numerous arguments in favor of It's demands, and has had it's secretary send out broadcast appeals for popular support. The commissions attitude has brought upon 1t strong and well merited censure, and certainly deprives its argu- ments of the value which ought to at tach to the official statements of a pub lie tribunal. Its attitude has, moreover furnished strong illustration of the in1- propriety of intrusting it with the prac- tically unlimited powers for which it asks.
 The pamphlet indulges in a labored at- tempt to explain why shippers do not more often bring suit under the present law much simpler and more rational explanation would seem to be that they must have been reasonably satisfied with the rates which were charged them. It may be accepted as settled at this time that whenever a railroad company is in the wrong and frequently when it is in the right there are plenty of lawyers willing and anxious to institute suits and take chances upon a recovery, and, in deed to save the plaintiff harmless in the way of costs and expenses of the litiga- tion.
 It may be added that it is practically admitted everywhere that railroad rates at this time are not per SC unreasonable or extortionate, but that on the contrary the general standard, of rates is reasona- bly low. It must follow, therefore, that if any particular rates are higher than they ought to be. there must result an unjust discrimination when rates are compared with rates in general on the same railroad. Therefore, any wrong in the matter of rates that now exists is really susceptible of adequate correction under a statute prohibiting unjust dis elimination
 In all of the twenty-three pages of the pamphlet referred to the only tangible suggestion of any actual condition which is undesirable is the fact that the rail roads in Alabama decline to pay $1 per day to consignees when the de livery of shipments is delayed. It is not disputed that there is a complete lega remedy when carriers unreasonably de- lay deliveries, and suits are frequently brought and recoveries had in event oi unreasonable delays There is no neces- sity, therefore, for imposing penalty oi this character on the railroad companies The reason for which consignees are re- quired to pay $1 per day for the use of a car of a railroad company are entirely different. The railroad company under taking to transport property does not un- dertake to furnish a warehouse at des- tination. It is matter not covered by the contract. It Is a use of the railroad company's property which Is very expen- sive to the railroad company, as 1t needs It's equipment for other shipments, and other shippers need the use of that equipment for actual transportation. Therefore 1t is perfectly reasonable that the shipper should be required to pay a small rent (which by the way is wholly inadequate) when they elect to use the railroad companys cars as warehouses. The fact that they are required to pay such rent is no reason why, the railroad companies should be required by law to pay penalty for delays in transporta- ton. when law already gives the con- signees adequate remedies for damage sustained for such delays. Therefore the only tangible grievance suggested by