Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1905-09-29
OLNEY on RATE REGULATION
Former Secretary Of State Outlines Attitude
of Ahti-Bryan Wing Of Democracy.
RAILWAY LINES ARE PRIVATE PROPERTY
Fixing of Rates by Commissions, He
Says, Are ImpracticabI and
Probably Unconsti-
tutional.

NEW YORK. Sept. 2s.-The reply Of the
conservative wing of the democratic party
to W. J. Bryan's recent letter to the
president on railroad rate legislation is
contained In an article by Richard Olney
In the October number OF American Re-
view today. In what is practically his
first public utterance in two years, Cleve-
lands former secretary of state presents
his final Judgment against the proposed
legislation, in the form of a brief. covering
not only the law, but the public policy
involved in the agitation. The following
are some OF the salient features of Mr
Olney's argument:
The Importance of the rate-making
power is not to be considered simply In
its relation to the carrier. The most inn
portant bearing of the power is upon pub
nc interests the carrier serves. 1t is mat
Ter OF common knowledge-of which the
courts take cognizance without proof-that
the great carriers of the present day are
the railroads 1t is equally matter of
common knowledge that the rates charged
by the railroads affect all classes OF the
community, that they determine very
prises and that upon them hinges only too
often the material well being il not the
very existence of towns and cities and
seaports and large sections of country.
surely a power, the exercise of which is
Iraught with such consequences, is not
70 70 be classed legally, or practically with
OF teas. The latter may well be delegated
TO an executive officer or board. But to
making power of the railroads to such an
officer or board would be surrender by
the legislature of one of its most important
functions.
Railroads Private Property.
In discussing the effects of government
regulation on railroads Mr.. olney says:
The situation to be anticipated then, is
a xra4
resenting private investments aggregating
billions of dollars-will find themselves
controlled in the vital matter OF their
charges; not by their private owners, but
by two public boards-one representative
or local interests and the other of national
interests and both antagonistic to the in
terests of the private owners concerned
The two boards will aim at the lowest
pi.iDIe possible rates, each in behalf of the par
uCular business under it's charge, and
VIII therefore be in constant rivalry with
each other in the endeavor to extort from
the carrier the best service at the smallest
cost. Under these conditions ANYTHING
ike sklllful, just, reasonable or stable
rate-making becomes impossible A sit
uatlon Is created intolerable alike to the
catIlers rs ana TO the public, and the sure
outcome-unless the whole scheme of gov
ernment rate making be abandoned-is
government ownership.
The significance and Importance Of the
inquiry are important If we remember that
lhe railroad Is only one species of high
no'ist mSs ana inc tnat what is true OF railroads
Jurisdiction of the national government
must be the same in both cases If II is
competent for the national government un.
der the commerce clause to own and one
rate all the great railroads OF the coun-
try II must be also competent for IL 10
own and control and operate all the great
highways of the country.
Says scheme IL ImpractIcable
In summing up the opposition to the
proposed legislation, Mr.. Olney reached the
following conclusions:
Ours is a government in both state and
natlon by political parties and to political
rate making for railroads-rate making by
politicians animated by partisan motives
and working for partisan ends-the obiec-
tions of an economic and business charac-
ter are ON the score of public policy gen
orally as obvious as they should prove
insuperable
The purpose of the present paper is TO
point out that beside such objections rail-
road rate making by the national gov
ernment presents legal and constitutional
dihhculties of the most serious character
II raises issues which concern the division
OF power between the several states and
the United States, which have not been
fully and finally passed upon by the ma
tonal supreme court, and which, IL sub
mttted to that tribunal, half or even
quarter of a century ago would In ali hu-
man probability have been determined ad-
versely to the jurisdiction of the general
government.