The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1902-11-12
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES


The-public hearing before the joint
committee on railroads the evening of
Nov. 3 brought out the railroad law
yers in force, who came prepared TO
annihiate the Ross bill relating to the
creation of board of railroad COM
missioners.
Judge Ross, the Trainer of the bill,
argued that the railroad commissioners
hould have as much power to enforce
its rulings as do county courts, main
tanning that one of the vital reasons
why the commissioners should be vest
ed with more authority is that inn
mediate action is needed in many III
stances, which would be impossible if
recourse must be had to the Supreme
Court, as is necessary under existing
statutes Many recommendations had
passed UNDECIDED by the railroads.
Judge Ross said: eff the railroads
have any objections / should like to
know what the are; this committee
should know
Judge Powers, representing the
Rutland railroad, complimented the
present board of commissioners but
was opposed to giving the board more
authority, claiming that it was dan
! gerous TO do so inasmuch as the Gov
/
! board too often " The public and rail
roads had no assurance that the policy
of the board would be maintained
from one administration to another.
| He thought the vesting of the board
with the authority they asked was
equivalent to constituting a new court
and as such the railroads would not
be entitled to tri )unal of fixed ability
as the board would be changed so
often. He believed that the present
statutes provided for every possible
| eXigency.
Judge Ross interrupted the speaker
to inquire where the existing statutes
gave the board any authority and re.
ferred to the matter of connections
between different roads. He got nc
satisfactory reply, Judge Powers re-
iterating that the rights of the public
were sufficiently guarded under pres
ent laws. Judge Powers said, Mt the
conclusion of his remarks "Thc
railrods are never afraid to risk theil
rights before the same tribunal yor
would risk yours. Senator Sutton
for the railroad committee, asked il
the proposed law precluded trial by
jury. Judge Ross said that no pro
vision had been made for such trial
Judge Powers asked Judge Ross if the
route to the Supreme Court was no
longer by way of the proposed law
Judge Ross replied, "No, sir, no
half as long. -
CIV. Writer'S, representing the Cen
trail Vermont railway, took the SAM
stand as did the lawyers who haC
preceded him. saying that the pro
posed bill made provision for certain
matters that were already provided 70
and that in the matter of death or in
jury by railroad companies it wa
always the policy of the railroads t,
: be fair. He said he had had man,
cases of this nature and that in ever,
instance his sympathy was with TIN
orphans or widows made by railroad
accidents.
f. NJ Harvey, clerk of the railwa.
commission, said that the railroad
had always ridiculed the commission
and its work, the orders and recon
mendations had been ignored. H
cited sections of the present Law
, commission but an ornament. H
, said that the people demand that thu
board be given authority.
w. B. G. Stickney, representing
the Central Vermont, said it wa
never intended that the board Of rail
road commissioners should be execu
tive in its character.
The committee listened patientl
until the lawyers had finished, whe
Chairman Bailey declared the hearing
adjourned.