The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-02-22
Chairman Reagan Answers the State.
ment Made by N. N. Crane.
THE COMMISSION LAW IS ATTACHED
What the Present Law Provides; Said to
Be Ample for the Protectiin OF the
Interest of All the People.

iHA-attpTnpN 1eucThl NJ. NJ. frame, III
what purports to he an Interview pub.
lished In the Dallas News of the 18th In
slant, lends the influence of his name to
those who favor the passage Of what Is
known as the maximum freight rate bill.
The known ability and high character of
General Crane, aud the important positions
he has occupied in the service of the State,
gives to his opinions such an amount of
influence as that IL he should be wrong
might do serious injury to the interests
of the people of Texas.
l regret that duty TO the public, in my
opinion, makes 1t incumbent upon me, In
the interests OF the public, to show that he
is greatly in error in the views h. ex-
presses In that interview.
The bill he discusses takes from the rail
road commission the power to make ans
other than maximum freight rates, ANA
coniers upon the railroad companies the
power to make all freight rates less than
sucu maximum rates. The amendm. MI \
pIopuseu ny the committee to ais blll 10
LOT relieve 1t OF tins objection
ne encct OF TINS Nuuiu DC to put The
railroads OF this state In competition with
each other, unrestralneu By me power OF
ihe railroad commission. The rcsJ,r OF
such policy has always uecn 10 priun
about rae wars between the railroads AHA
this invites wars of discrimination in rates
between different localities, and between
different shippers, even in the same To-
calty, and Tins would undoubtedly Oe the
result IL such bill should become n law
Such a policy would put the people and
business OF Texas back into the position
ana subject to all the evils and injustIcrs
10 which they were subject before tue rni-
road commission law was passed 10 pie
vent a continuance of those conditions end
10 remedy the evils which they caused. 10
the people of Texas desire this!
The people of Texas in 1850 adopted the
amendment OF the constitution which au-
thorized the passage of the law creating
the railroad commission and investing the
commission with the power to make, reg
uitte ana maintain all freight rates. Inc
blI under consideration would limit IFS
power III this respect 10 the making IF
maximum rates only, and would annul
many OF the provisions of the commiasi IN
law. Whatever may have been the ,lr-
pose OF those who devised this Iii, tbat
would be its inevitable effect
This bin docs not state in terms whether
commission shall be generally applicable
TO all roads or special in their application
TO each road. II general In their npplan-
ton TO all roads, maximum rates which
Texas Central railway would bankrupt the
weaker roads; and the maximum rates
which would be proper for the weaker
roads would. If applied to the more mpor
tant roads, make the rates nigh as 10
make it cheaper to haul in wagons
In the Interview referred TO- General
of the railroad commission never intended
to prevent the railroads from giving low
rates e. the people. Their only purpose
bly, high M II Se
present law has always been that rail-
road inclrs no penalty for charging low
er rate than adopted by the commission,
providing it does not unjustly discriminate
against persons or places, but 1t seems that
the ratlroad commission entertains !. dif-
ferent view"
n I I'm TO lie
law does require the commission to do
more than to prevent the railroads from
giving low rates to the people. 1T requires
the commission to make or to adont and
TO regulate and enforce all freight rates.
One Of its purposes, not the only one,
wns TO protect shippers against rnneces
sary high rates. And,
.. That this commission has always held
| that If the railroads charged over rates
than those prescribed by it. and made
them applicable to all persons alike, the
law furnished no penalty for this, bat that
| If in doing this. it made low rates TO some
| persons and not to Others, 1t became liable
| to the penalty for unlawful discrlmina-
| ton.
! Again General Crane says that: The
| weakness of the opposition to this bill Is
made apparent in this, that the railroad
reduce rates that they recognize too high.
| The last attempt was enJoined by me
courts. II these rates were then too high;
| they are too high now, and If the railroad
companies or any one or more of them are
willing voluntarily to do what the com,
mission sought to compel them to do, |
am unable to see why they ought not to be
| permitted to do 1t.
| On this quotation | have TO say /. That
1t had been the constant purpose OF TINS
| commission TO make freight rates ow
as they could keeping In view the neces-
sity of preserving to the railroads yhch
revenue as would justly compensate them
tor their services. And.
. II rates made by the commission We're
such that the railroad companies sought to
! enioin them, then does General crane thlnh
| 1t logical to assume that they would make
lower rates? And. If not, why make a
statement like this? And If rates below
! what would be reasonably compensatory
| TO the carriers should be made, no ODDS ny
| whom, would their enforcement not he
| subject 10 he enjoined by the courtsE Ana
| is 1t reasonable to suppose snch rates
would he made unless for some dishonest
General Crane favors the maximum rate
! bin with proper safeguards. nut ne ZOE,
not Indicate what these safeguards should
be. IL the desire is to have freight rat, =
which are Just to the people ana TO log
railroads and which secure equal rates g
all people and to all places. We nave az
these under the law as IL nov STANDS ano
under the action of the railroad commits
sion What more or better can any honeS
man desire or expectF Ana now are we y
Improve this condition by changing w
fnrr, Of the law? We are In the daily
, habit of making reduced rates ~ tne re
quest of the different railroads and never
refuse to do so unless to prevent dlScrih
nation. .., 80,
| 1elous statement contained IN thls sun
nosed interview with General Crane. III
: ! Is made 10 say that: "A refusal to pass TIM
bill and then follow by continued con
sfru,.tion of the existing law. such as WI
. nrcyout the cities and towns or Texas iron
deriving benefit from competition, w"ll'
he most hurtfui TO all of our interests am
n,inst 10 the cities and towns involved.
2 viii he practically saying 10 the cities AM
toyna Of Texas that have 10 put mp =
: mnch money to secure competing hnes
!, railronds, and that they shall have non
~ the henehts of the competition 10
! which they have so dearly paid, except Il
5 matters of interstate freight
Z ON this I have TO say, nrst. Ihat mi
I with the balance Of his interview SNOW
!, thnt he regards connection bet wecn IN
D .at,roads as better for the people thal
D inst and equal rates. And THIS In lart !
j The central issue IN this discussion nav
I nolnted out the tact that the effect O
comprtitlon between the railroads y no
IN Secure lust ard cural rates betwfrl
dinerent shinpers and different places IN
thar its eject Is 10 bring abont rate wars
ratc cutting rebates and unjust discrln
inatlons between different shippers an
diffarent rIties and towns ana parts
tbe State. 10 cause the railroads 70 Oh
against zach other for the business Of sue
nersons and places, and 10 cause shippet
II MD against each other In order 70 o.
tnin rebates, cut rat *, and unjust dis
EXAMINATIONS; and thus to produce netwee,
the railroad eompanier strife ana lil.pioon