Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-05-02
BONDS STATEMENT ITS FUND COMPLETE
His Road Long Ago Set It's Local Y M. G. A. Secures
Face Against Rebates. Money for New Building
A GOOD MEASURED REJOICING TODAY
INTERSTATE COMMERCE CABLEGRAM CoNGRATULA
TON WOODWARD
Sim
Bills.
His Road Long Ago Set It's
Face Against Rebates.
A GOOD M E ASH RE
PRESENT INTERSTATE COMMERCE
ACT AMENDED BY ELKINS ACT.
Discussed the Use of Words in the
Esch-Townsend and Sim
liar Bills.

Mr. Hugh L. Bond, second vice president
and general counsel of the Baltimore and
Ohio Railroad Company. today resumed his
statement before the Senate committee on
interstate commerce, which is investigating
the problem of railway rates. discrimina-
tons and rebates, with a view to necessary
and remedial legislation. Mr.. Bond said
that as long ago 1897 the Baltimore
and Ohio railroad had officially announced
that 1t would have to set it's face against
rebates, and would, moreover, do all in it's
power TO prevent its competitors from
granting rebates He considered 1t remark
able, Mr.. Bond said, that some of those
persons who were now most earnestly ad-
vocating the passage of the Esch-Townsend
bin or some similar measure should have
at that time threatened to boycott his road
for taking the position that 1t would neither
give rebates nor allow it's competitors to do
so. They-meanng the traffic managers for
the big shippers-had felt their positions
threatened, he said, by the passage of the
act to regulate commerce.
Interstate Commerce Act.
Mr.. Bond thought the original interstate
commerce act would have been much more
satisfactory if 1t had not been loaded down
with penalties in the House. 1t would have
gone into actual practical effect years be-
fore it did, he thought, if it had not been
handicapped by the penal provisions in
question. They were nothing more nor less
than distractions to the smooth operation
of the law
The witness thought that the present in
terstate commerce act amended and
brought up to date by the Elkins act was
a very good law measure. The Elkins act
had remedied it in the one great deficiency
that time and experience had developed
Nv lnr1I hll1 hot ha n a 10
tween persons was covered by the ElklnS
act in the only way possible, and that that
measure also fully competent to cope
with the question of discrimination between
localities or in description of traffic. I'm
der the decisions of the Supreme Court IN
Interpreting the law, the controlling factor
In deciding whether a difference in rates is
justified is the commercial circumstances OF
the two cases. The remedy along this
line since the enactment of the Elkins law
has been, Mir. Bond thought efficient and
speedy.
Mr. Bond stated that while he had made
most of his references to the Esch-Townsend
pill, he did not in reality wish TO make an
lttack on any one bill. They were all alike,
ne insisted, and all bad. The Hepburn bill
ne considered as also in this category. But
with regard to the Esch-Townsend Dill ne
wished to say that it apparently gave the
interstate commerce commission brahd
new power. That measure gave the COM
mission authority to deal with the "reguia-
lions and practices affecting the Transports
the similar phrase had always been regu-
iations and practices affecting rates The
mower for the commission to deal with the
transportation of persons and property
was a brand new proposition, and he
called the attention of the committee TO us
scope, and the possibility of the conse-
uuences that might follow its exercise.
Discussed the Use of Words.
Mr.. Bond then discussed the use of the
words reasonable" ..unrea sonable," Just
and unjust" ETC., used in the Esch-Town-
send and similar bills. These words. Mr.
Bond said have through experience and the
decisions of courts acquired legal mean
,ng, and the present interstate commerce
act has been sustained as being sufnclenliy
definite in the use of the words in question.
But il would not be possible, he thought, 10
take these words and simply because they
had been used in the present act use theH
In new act in a different sense or In
different connection, where their meaning
does not go with them, and perhaps make
an act that would not be constitutional.
For instance, Mr.. Bond said, the WORD
Reasonable" has acquired definition by
reference, not to the opinion OF any one
man not TO the discretion of any one man
pr q body of men, but 1t has meaning
referable to the decisions of courts and
based on facts. 1t Is referable TO some
thing outside of anybody's discretion and
1t is necessary TO keep 1t in that sense IL
II is used, he said, in any way That gives
The commission discretionary power TO say
what is reasonable-not the power simply
to tse their brains and come 10 decision,
but discretionary power as 10 choose pc pc
tween different things which are reasonable
the danger line had been reached and
perhaps passed
Mr.. Bond said further that he consid-
Fred ii perfectly clear that Congress can
rav thar the rates shall not be unreason-
nble or that the rates shall be reasonable
without further explanation, and can say
also that a body OF men appointed by IL
sfGfiy n a
with the legal standard, and say what
changes must be made in the existing rate
TO bring it into line with the legal stand
ard and that the legal standard may be de-
fined 81 the words reasonable and 'un-
reasonable in their legal sense, and pro-
vided that the meaning Is not tempered
with by leaving 1t referable TO the olscre-
ton of the commission.
The witness said he was not, in a way
so greatly opposed TO the Esch-Townsend
bill, as he did not believe it would ever
stand in the courts. His great objection
was that ii would confuse the subject for
years would lead to endless litigation, and
would require at least two decisions of the
Supreme Court, and perhaps even more to
find out Just what the law meant and what
1t was. Mr.. Bond commented as follows on
the Esch-Townsend bill:
1.-The man who drew that act intended to
draw an act that would give the commits
sion the margin of discretion in fixing the
rates as between extortionate and confisca-
tory rates That Is what he meant, and
that Is what the commission has said over
and over again that they would get and
they have said it in hearings before this
committee, think. that If such an act was
passed there would be no power in the
courts to control them. because they would
be clothed with just that discretionary
power which could not be controlled by a
court"
Testimony Yesterday Afternoon.
Hugh L. Bond second vice president and
general attorney of the Baltimore and Ohio
railroad, was heard yesterday afternoon
and discussed the laws and decisinns reIat=