The Birmingham age-herald., 1905-01-13
SAMUEL SPENCER MAKES ARGUMENT Opposes Increasing Powers of
 the Commission FIGHT WILL BE IN TIE SENATE 
Even If Measure Passes House It Is Unlikely That Any Drastic Meas gre Can Get Through
 the Senate.


 Washington, January 12-(Special.)- Railroad men from all over the country were present before the House interstate commerce committee this morning to lis ten to President Samuel Spencer of the Southern make an argument against the passage of a measure increasing the pow CT of the interstate commerce commis- sion in the matter of railroad rates. The president of the Southern made an effective argument against the propo- sition, and should the House decide to report such a bill it will have strong minority report against it. It seems to be accepted that the railroad interests will confine their opposition to a fight before the committee, and in case bill Is reported will not offer serious opposi- ton on the floor of the House. The sub ject has begun to grow very popular In the country districts, and many members representing agricultural communities, while opposed to legislation themselves, are hearing from their constituents In no i uncertain tones In endorsement of the views of the President Many members therefore incline to the view that the pub lie sentiment will force a bill through the house, perhaps at this session, along the lines of the Presidents recommends tions.
 Great Fight In Senate.
 At the same time however, the great fight on the whole subject will occur in the Senate where 1t Is safe to say no hi fc all aGti its provisions. The passage of a measure in the House Is a comparatively small matter and Is no indication whatever of what may finally become of the statutes.
 MT Spencer was authorized to voice the sentiment of the New York Central
 Erie, Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul, Northern Pacific. Central, Delaware, Lackawana and Western and other rail- way companies
 He is the first direct and official repre- sentative of the railways to be heard by the committee and his testimony is regarded as the keynote of the oppo- sition to the rate fixing by the govern ment.
 Mir Spencer stated at the outset that 1t was not his purpose to discuss the sub ject in its entirety. There were, how ever, a number of important points which he wished to emphasize. Before the oper- ation of the interstate commerce law, the rebate and the secret contract of discrim- inatory devices of various kinds were the rule. Now the reverse is the case. Rates are substantially maintained.
 All Agree Rebates Are Wrong.
 There is no difference of opinion" con tlnued MT Spencer, between the rail roads of t4.e country, Congress and the President on the subject that rebates are wrong We agree with the language of the President that the highways of trans portaton must be kept open to all upon equal terms. On that basis the railway companies are ready and anxious to aid and cooperate. But l do not think any additional legislation is necessary in or der to proceed against that particular class of abuses If such legislation does appear to Congress to be necessary the railways of the country will certainly stand, and I have no hesitation in saying so, in cooperation and aid to that end' That particular phase of regulations has already been pronounced by the comms- sion as fully covered by existing statutes. It simply becomes a question of enforce ment of the law.
 But the question before you is not of that character-it is that of the powers to name a rate upon the part of the com mission after complaint and hearing. It has been claimed this will be means of stopping rebates. This claim have no hesitation fir dsputing, and will give that attention later.'
 for the proposed legislation, MT. Spencer answered 1t by reviewing the situation as developed during the last eighteen years About 90 per cent of all the claims or questions of various kinds which have been presented to the interstate com merce commission during that time have been adjusted without formal nearing and dao ha rf Of That" he said. "does not indicate either a right or non-co-operation on the | part of the railroads
 Acquesced in Decision. MT Spencer said the railroads asquies- | ced in four-fifths of the decisions of the | commission. "Out of the forty-three | which went to litigation" he continued, l '.twenty-ive related to rates, and in | twenty-two out of the twenty-five cases l the decisions of the commission were re- | yersed by the courts One case only was alarmed by the courts in it's entirety, while two were partly confirmed, and partly reversed These figures covered | eighteen years, and railroad mileage Of | 2ly.O00 miles at the present time and | 115.OO0 miles at the beginning of the period | named.
 Does this indicate the necessity for | legislation with respect 10 repatesf l queried Nr. Spencer.
 | He expressed the confidence of the rail- | road world in the commission, and said 1t | vast justly worthy of the respect Of the | country There was only one feature of l the "Quares-Cooper' bill which ne | wished to discuss specfi ,ally, that was the portion conferring power on the com
 mission to substitute a rate for one com p.sined of as unreasonable after due | hearing. said rate to remain in effect sub | feet to change only by the commission,
 or by the courts on appeal by the rall- I ways.
 l MT. Spencer denied the commission ever
 legally had such power and said the
 courts in 1897 had prohibited the exer- 1 else of the power by the commlssion'
 To Prevent Determinations.
 The most important claim in behalf or
 the proposal, MT. Spencer believed to be
 that such a power would enable the com
 mission to prevent discrimination be-
 tween localities This question or ad-
 iusting rates between localities, he said,
 was the most difficult and intricate or | all The present adjustvent was the out
 growth of natural corhpatition not only
 between localities which had and would always exist but between railroads as well. Taking the cpmmittee's rsnnxA Ax- /