The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-12-14

Tt is an absurdity to expect to eiim- mate the abuses in great corporations b. State action. It h dinhcuit to De patient with an argument that such m atters should be left to the states, because more than one state pursues the idea of creating on easy terms cor pcrafions which are never operated within the state at all. but in other States whose laws they ignore. The Nationai Government alone can ade- quately deal with these great corpor- ations."
 Then the President goes on to quail fy the manner in which the great cor- porations should be handled oy the eovernment. invoking temperance, toIeration and the like. and leaves direct treatment of the general subject of corporations by reference to the need of maintaining of whatever of mischief or of evil there is to interstate commerce. in the conduct of great cor poraifons,' and. in conclusion. he de- cIares; These corporations should be manaEed with due regard to the in terest of the public as whole;" that where this can be done under the present laws 1t must be done;" that where these laws come short others should be enacted to supplement them" Mir. Roosevelt quoted from the speech of .the President of one of our great railroad systems lot of sentiment about proper treatment of the public, | but In nothing of the hundreds Of words he quoted from the railway l maEnate was there a hint of acquies- .cerice in the notion that Interstate commerce is peculiarly the field of the general government" except in the l contingency that the corporations fail | to make plain to the public wherein | they think the public will be benefit | ted by their operations.
 In what the message has of the work | of the Bureau of Corporations thesc | things were said which set by their tinsling ears every railway chieftain in the country:
 Above all else, we must strive to keep the highways of commerce open to all In equal terms; and to do this 1t Is necessary to put complete stop to all rebates. Whether the shipper of the railroad is to blame makes no difference: the rebate must be stopped, the abuses of the private car and pri- vate terminal track and side-track sys- tems must be stopped. and the legisla- tion of the Fifty-eighth Congress which declares it unlawful for any per- son or corporation to offer. grant. give, solicit, accept or receive any rebate
 
 to the transportation of any property In ! interstate or foreign commerce, wher- by such property shall by any device whatever be transported at a less rate than that named in the tariffs must be enforced.
 For some time after the enactment l of the act to regulate commerce 1t re- l mained a mooted question whether that act conferred upon the Interstate Com
 merce Commission the power. after 1t
 had found challenged rate to he un- l reasonable. to declare what thereafter | should, prima facie. be the reasonable maximum rate for tho transportation in | dispute. The Supreme Court finally | resolved that question in the negative | so that as the law now stands the | commission simply possesses the bare
 power to denounce a particular rate as | unreasonable.
 While I am of the opinion that at present 1t would be undesirable. if il were not impracticable, finally to | clothe the commission with general l authority to fix railroad rates, I do be-
 lieve that, as. fair security to ship 1 pers, the commission should be vested
 with the power. where given rate
 has been challenged and after full
 hearing found to be unreasonable, to
 decide. subject to judicial review. what
 shall be a reasonable rate to take its
 place; the ruling of the commission tc
 take effect immediately. and to obtain
 unless and until it is reversed by the