Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1905-12-06
Rates an Rate INEQUALITIES.

In his Raleigh speech the President adj
vapeed no new argument in support of
federal control of railway rates, says the
Washington correspondent of the New
York sun, under date of Nov. 8. With
| characteristic vigor he pounded rec
| ognized evil for the suppression of which
existing laws are only little short of duly
adequate.
He made no allusion to the possible re-
suits OF a stern and unrelenting enforce
ment OF laws already provided for the re-
straint of what he calls ''unscrupulous
and ruthless cunning in railway manage
ment," by which "some big shippers and
some railroad managers who are always
willing to take unfair advantage; OF their
weaker competitors force other big ship
pers and big railroad men who would like
20 do decently into similar acts of wrong
and injustice, under penalty of being left
behind in the race for success.
This, which is the main line of the Pres
ident's argument, does not seem to touch
the principal issue of the present con-
sideration, namely, the question of reason
able rates. Upon the issue of the equal
ity of rates and treatment for all shippers
there is little room for argument. Ship
pers, railways and the public are
in general agreement upon that poict.
With some elaboration of the present laws,
to which little OF no objection will be
raised, the point OF unfair discrimination
may be covered as well as it can be. 1t is
doubtful If any such law could be made
| absolutely effective.
But that is an issue which is quite dis
tinct from the proposal to place rate
| making powers in the hands OF an admin
| istrative body. There appears to be con-
fusion upon this point. There is wide
difference between the prohibition of any
form of unfair discrimination between
shipper and shipper, or between point and
point, and the determination of rate
| charges by federal commission. 1t is to
the latter and not to the former that OBJ
lection is made. Mr. Roosevelt said that
'actual experience has shown that it is
not possible to leave the railroads uncon-
trolled. l do not know the exact period
of this actual experience. l am under an
impression that railways are, and always
have been, subject TO a long list OF re-
straining laws, statutory as well as
economic"
Our transportation system has made this
country what 1t is to-day. Our develop
ment has not come in spite of our system,
but because OF it. That abuses have crept
in is undeniable. Abuses have crept into
our government controlled postal system
and into our government supervised and
regulated banking system. But freedom
of action in rate making has enabled rail-
ways to open enormous areas of otherwise
valueIess land, and to distribute the prod
ucts of our farms and our workshops in a
manner impossible under restrained
action. The history of all state rate
making shows the inevitable tendency of
that method toward the fiat distance tariff.
Such a system in this country of enormous
areas and distances would turn farms into
waste places and valuable machinery into
junk.
Nowhere in the entire range Of the rail-
way discussion has it been shown that the
country has suffered or that il IN suffering
from excessive railway rates. Outside of
individual instances, whose rarity makes
them almost unique, there has been
neither complaint OF excessive charges
nor elamor for reduction by federal
commission. The call for rate regulation
by commission or by court does not
come from our thousandsupon thousands
of shippers. 1t is the cry OF q few who
hope to gain by it, augmented by the
roaring OF non-shippers who have little or
no knowiedge OF transportation questions.
The country, the shippers, and even the
railways will support the President in any
effort to remedy evils, to correct abuses,
to stamp out inequalities and unfair dis
ordinations. But it is not railway mana
gers only who are staggered by proposals
that a commission be empowered either to
! fix rates or to regulate railway tariffs.