The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-01-18

Judge GroSScup OF the United
Il N States circuit court. the city
Of Chicago in the absence of
a specific contract to the contrary, has
the right to regulate the price of gas
within reasonable limits. The question
Of what constitutes reasonable limits is
left to the state courts to determine.
In Chicago u merger OF competitive
gas companies was lately formed and
IL rate named which. in the opinion Of
the city officials, was excessive. There
upon the city legislative department
passed an ordinance cutting the rate
TO rs cents thousand feet. The COM
pany contested in the courts and the
above mentioned decision followed.
It's meaning is that the burden of proof
falls upon the company to show that
the 70 cent rate is an unreasonable
one.
In one sense this is victory for
those who claim large municipal rights
of supervision over public utility COR
porations: but in another view it leaves
the subject about where it was before.
It has long been understood, for eX
ample, that Scrantonan not satisfied
with the charge made for either water
or gas by the Scranton Gas and Water
company could make an appeal to
court. and upon production Of evidence
showing that the charge was excessive
q reduction would follow. In the case
supposed. however, the burden of proof
would be upon the petitioner for relief;
and if he succeeded in establishing his
point it would exercise no force in the
case Of his next door neighbor, who
would have to go through the same
tedious and expensive process if de-
sirous of relief.
The obvious difficulty with this mode
of procedure is that it gives a decided
advantage to the corporation. The cor
poration has it's regular corps of law
yers and with comparatively little ad-
ditional cost can pursue an action from
court to court until it eXhausts the
financial strength of it's single adver
sary and wins through his enforced de-
fault. Where an excessive rate is
proved the corporation does not have
to repay past eXactions nor is recovery.
possible: the only benefit of winning a
long drawn out and costly suit against
it is in reference to future charges. SO
that it might easily happen and in our
judgment very frequently does happen,
that the individual citizen, although
conscious of being excessively charged,
feels that it is cheaper to pay the over
charge than to pit his feeble strength
against the mighty strength Of the
cyactng corporation in a legal battle
into which he would enter heavily
handicapped from the beginning.
That state Of affairs is but slightly
affected by Judge Grosscup's decision,
assuming that his decision is valid and
final. 1t still remains that the arti-
fetal person, as the corporation is
called in law, has the advantage over
the natural person. who was on earth
first, and who, in the eye of humanity
at least, is certainly as much entitled
to consideration as the chartered child
of legislative favor. There have been
wild revolts against such inequalities;
and they have usually, by their very
wildness. played directly into the
hands of the interests at which they
have been aimed. This seems to have
been particularly true of the five per
cent. tax lately levied on the gross re-
ceipts of the local water company. AL
though there is one chance in a million
that the city will ever collect penny
of this absurd levy, there is no doubt
whatever of the company's ability to
collect every penny Of the 81 additional
charge put upon every property owner
with that tax as its very convenient
preteSt
There is need of less wildness and
more careful thinking III the handling
OF this problem,