The Birmingham age-herald., 1905-08-12
IS GIVEN HARD BLOW Commissioner Clements Has Filed Dissenting Opinion CITIES ARE HANDICAPPED By DifferentiaIs Decision the Rate To Raised on Goods Shipped From
 Western to Southern
CITIES ARE HANDICAPPED


 Southern interests opposing the F. S. c. Townsend bill and other proposals which look toward government rate making or rate fixing" as some of its advocates prefer to call it. are deriving good deal of satisfaction from some expressions by Interstate Commerce Commissioner Clem- ents, their one representative in his dis senting opinion in what is known as the "differentials case"
 MT. Clements who before becoming a commissioner of interstate commerce, was a distinguished member of congress from the state of Georgia, is the only southern member of the commission, which has always been dominated by it's northerr membership and he naturally objected fo q decision which deprived Baltimore, Newport News and Norfolk, and indirectly the whole south of large share of the advantage in rates which the railways had voluntarily accorded to those ports. The differentials decision from which Commissioner Clements dis scented was that by which the differen- tials to Baltimore, Newport News, and Norfolk were cut down one-haf, thus raising the rate on goods shipped from the west to southern ports. In registering his objection MT. Clements said:
 Suppress Competition.
 'In my judgment the conclusions reach- ed do violence to the great principle of competition which congress and the su- preme court have so jealously and con- sistently nourished as one of the funda- mental rights of the public. In declar- ing as between competing lines and com peting points what differentials shall gov ern we hamper competition and by this regulation of distribution effect in real ity a division of territory, division of traffic and a division of earnings. which in substance and effect tend to defeat not only the purposes of the antitrust act against the restraint of trade, but the pooling provision of the interstate com merce act, with the enforcement of which the interstate commerce commission if charged. May competing carriers law fully effect through the agency of the commission restraint of competition and trade by a division of traffic among themselves and the ports when to do the same thing through an agency of their own would be unlawful? l think not.
 "The expectation of putting these ques- tions to ultimate rest could spring only from a Utopian dream. Their perma- nent rest is perhaps neither practicable in view of the interests of the ports and carriers nor desirabie in the interest of the public.
 .'The unmolested freedom of competi- tion by lawful methods permitting the free course of traffic Is more likely to give to each community and carry the fair and just reward of It's enterprise and public spirit and just rates to the public than any devised plan or fixed diff ferentials between competing carriers to compose conflicting interests by appor- tionment of the traffic and which in the nature of the case must be more or less arbitrary"
 Newcomb Agrees With Clements.
 MT. H. T. Newcomb, a prominent law yer of Washington. formerly connected with the interstate commerce commis- sion in commenting on Commissioner Clements objections today in an inter- view, said:
 .Commissioner Clements has defined the unjustness of the dlfferentials deci- sion. that is, it's tendency to prevent com petition and to prevent locality from gaining the fair and just reward of it's enterprise Commissioner Clements holds that the principle involved in the de- cision rendered by the commission is all wrong, and one having read his objections can hardly fail to agree with him.
 "It must be remembered. however that the principle underlying this decision of the commission Is that underlying all it's decisions, for the commission Is, and necessarily must be, given to one policy and only one. The great point which Com missioner Clements seems to have over looked is that the application of this principle to which he so strongly objects in tine differentials case would be just as dangerous and undesirable in any other case.
 Commission Must Be Consistent.
 "Decisions of the commission resultine in restraint of trade and competition fin the past are numerous. There are the examples, for instance, of Grand Rapjds carriage case and the so-called Party rate case both exactly similar to the differentials case in which an ot,inton has just been handed down. In each of these cases the decision rendered bv the commission was held to be a restraint of trade and competition. It is perfectlv plain that the doctrine underlying the differential devision of the commission fo which Commissioner Clements SC strtn- uously objects. will, and does underlse