The Topeka state journal., 1905-12-22

tempt will be made to take the rate
making power from the railroads and
place it in a government tribunal.
Ihey are left with the same power
they now have to say what the rates
shall be for the future, provided they
are reasOna BILE. They are prohibited
now from making rates that are un-
reasonable and unjust and they are
tween shippers, charging one more
than another for the same service.
When they have made a rate that is
unreasonable and unjust. there should
be some kind of a tribunal to de-
termine that fact, before the shipper
is compelled to pay the rate; and also
to say to the carrier that any new rate
it may make must not be higher than
a certain limit. That some tribunal
should have the power to determine a
reasonable maximum rate for the
future in place of the rate that has
been declared unreasonable, all now
admit.
It resolves itself into the best method
of procedure and the question is, What
is the fairest, quickest and most -ez-
peditiOus method of settling differences
that arise between shipper and carrier?
The bills all provide for abolishing re-
bates and regulating icing charges and
private car lines. All the bills provide
for an inspections by the government of
the accounts and books of railways en-
gagged in interstate commerce similar
10 the examination IndI CQe government
makes of national banks, so as to detect
determinations by carriers. There is no
division of sentiment in congress and no
opposition to legislation more clearly to
provide for equal charges for all ship
DerS for the same service. Rebates and
determinations between individuals
must stop, but a difference arises as to
the tribunal that should be invested
with the power to determine what is a
reasonable maximum rate for the fu-
ture.
Three Plans Proposed.
There are three different plans pro-
posed in congress: First the bill intro
duced by Senator Foraker which pro-
vides that the interstate commerce COM
mission shall do less in the inYestiga-
ton of a complaint than it does now
making only a preliminary investiga-
ton; and without making an order shall
submit a brief statement to the attor-
ney general who shall file petition
in a circuit court of the United States.
The court is required to inquire into
the facts and enjoin any rate in excess
of what the court shall find to be rea-
sonable and just and the rate found to
be reasonable shall be the lawful rate
in the future.
Second The proposition of Senator
Ellxins which provides that the inter
state commerce commission shall have
the power after investigating a COM
plant against a certain rate to make
an order modifying such rate so far as
may be necessary to remove the unrea-
sonableness, the order to take effect
within such time as the commission may
prescribe. Any party affected by such
order can institute a proceeding to re-
view it in a circuit court of the United
States and if the court in such proceed
ing finds that the rate fixed by such car
Iier was not unreasonableys It snail set
aside the order made by the commits
sion; or if the court finds that such or
der of the commission modified the rate
fixed by the carrier either more or less
than was necessary to remove the un-
reasona bleness of such rate, then the
court by its decree may modl1y the or
der of the commission accordingly.
Both of these plans provide for the
fixing of future rate by the courts;
that of Senator Foraker imposes the
duty upon the court in the first in
stance without any preliminary order
of the commission. That of Senator
Elkins provides that the commission
shall make an order fixing the future
rate and that it shall go into effect
but leaves to the court in a proceeding
brought by the carrier the province of
inQuiring into the whole matter from
the beginning, and either to raise or
lower the rate of the commission. The
question viii naturally be asked by the
shipper who has been subjected to in
terminable delay under the present pro-
cedure, What advantage VIII there be
under either of these plans over that
Wnlcn now exists ana VIII 1AAS SoAA - %
sumo this power when they have decid-
ed that fixing a future rate is a legis-
lative power and not judicial2
The third plan is the one proposed by
the interstate commerce commission IN
its bill On fixing a future rate its bill
provides that after the hearing on a
complaint, the commission is to deter
mine what is just and reasonable
rate in place of the one II Iouha 10 De
unreasonable and it can f1k a maximum
rate, minimum rate. a differential, OF
change the classification of any article.
This proposition goes further than the
recommended tion Of the president which
inum rate The order goes into effect
/ on a date fixed by the commission Any
carrier can bring proceedings IN a clr-
cult court of the United Slates to set
aside or vacate the order. If the court