The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1905-11-11

their commercial ambition as would
the military heroes of the past to sat
isfy their thirst for martial achieve
ment
Two remedies have been suggested
for the correction of these evils. One
is that the government own and oper-
ate the railroads and the other that
the government regulate and control
them. The railroads are asking to be
let alone. They are satisfied with
their present system.
Opposed to Government Ownership.
President Roosevelt is opposed to
government ownership but strongly
favors government regulation. He
asks that the interstate commerce
commission be given power to decide
controversies relating to rates and
/ that it be given authority to enforce
it's decisions or that some other tri-
bunal be created that will have au-
thority under the law to decide such
controversies and enforce its DEGREES.
Ia other words, If a. shipper in New
ton believes that he is being discrimi-
mated against and unjustly treated by
the railroads, the president asks that
such citizen be given an opportunity
| to bring his complaint before a tri-
bunal competent to pass upon the
merits Of the question involved; that
when such tribunal has heard the case
and rendered a decision it have au-
thority to enforce its decree. Can
there be anything unreasonable or I'M
fair about this proposition? It is sim
ply providing a method for the right
ing of a wrong If such exists.
The specific recommendation of the
president that the railroads are oppos-
ing more bitterly than all others is
that when the interstate commerce
commission rendered its decision as
to the reasonableness of a rate that
such decision become effective at once
and remain in effect unless reversed
by the supreme court of the United
States. This, it is claimed. is extreme,
unusual and revolutionary: that it
nullihes the right of appeal which is
one of the fundamental privileges of
a litigant. This argument has i'm
pressed some conservative men who
do not understand the nature of the
questions involved in these rate con-
troversies. The facts are that unless
the decision in a rate case is made
with reasonable promptness 1t fails
in its purpose. 1t takes from three
months to two years from the time a
case is brought before the interstate
/ commerce commission until a decision
can be secured. If the decision is
then suspended until the case is heard
before the supreme court of the Unit
ed States it will cause a delay of from
one to three years longer and in the
meantime the compliments business
has been ruined and a decision in his
favor is of no value to him. Then,
again, the most worthy CONF lainants
are frequently men of small means
and would not be able to endure the
determinations imposed upon them
and stand the expense of long and
tedious litigation before the supreme
court of the United States. To COM
pei them to do this is to deny them re-
| lief from oppression and injustice. In
rate discrimination it is the weak
who suffer most and a law that does
not relieve them viii not meet the re-
quirements or satisfy the demands Of
the people.
Senator Knox's Opinion.
There is no man in this country
whose opinions carries greater weight
on a question Of this kind, than ex-
Attorney General Knox. He is a man
of the broadcast legal learning, OF the
most upright purposes and the widest
experience. In a recent speech in re-
ferring to this phase of President
Roosevelt's railroad policies, Senator
Knox said:
ssThere is no railway in the United
states that can be in the slightest de-
gree affected by legislation giving re-
lief from unreasonable rates and prac-
tees unless it is guilty of unreasonable
and unjust practices. There is no
practice of any railway that it adopts
or sanctions that can be declared to
| be unreasonable or unjust until it is
challenged in a quasi judicial proceed
ing, and proved to be unjust and I'M
reasonable after the fullest hearing
and argument.
There is no order that can be
made by any commission or board
now existing, or which it is proposed
| to create, that can change a rate of
| practice that is unreasonable or IN
! Just without its order being subject
I to review in a judicial proceeding in
the United States circuit court upon
the ground Of the unreasonable
of the order of the commission, and
there is no law that does and prob
ably no law could be enacted that
could prevent the court if satisfied
| that Injustice had been done the rail-
| roads, from staying the operation Of
/ the order upon terms until the court
Continued on Page Elve.l