The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1905-10-05

Representative Charles e. Townsend
OF Michigan, is al the Raleigh and will
be here for several days.
Mr. Townsend. discussfngarate Ieg1sIa-
ton. says
when the House convenes In Deoem-
Der will Introduce my bilf TO regulate
railroad rates 1t will be the same meas
ure which the House passed last Feb
ruary with the exception that the bill
win be amended in several sections to
meet certain criticisms and objections
that have been raised against It since
1ts passage
I'm other words It Will be perfected
ana the language relating to the pri-
vate cars and terminal charges win be
made more specific, so there can be no
question as to the power OF the Inter
state Commerce Commission TO deal
with this very important phase of the
question. But Il always believed and
maintained that the bill as passed
covered the private car. etc.
Since the passage OF the Esch-Town-
send hill the railroads have gradually
come forward and expressed a willing
ness to concede the unreasonableness
or certain regulations, but they are not
willing to Yield the question OF fixed
charges And that is the main ques-
ton
Measure Not Drastic.
Let any unprejudkced person give
careful consideration to the Esch-Town-
send bill and he will be forced TO admit
that there Is nothing drastic nor I'M
constitutional In the measure passed by
the House last winter. It merely Gre
ates law TO confer on the Interste. 9
Commerce Commission the power TO de-
ternine what is an unjust rate or regu-
lation and to INK a just rate or feeula-
ton after both parties to the issue
have had full and free hearing. And
for ten years the Interstate Commerce
Commission exercised practically this
power under existing LAW until the de-
cision of the court in the maximum rate
case. when the court held that the COM
mission had no authority.to fix maxi
mum rate.
acouiesced in the findings or rulings OF
the commission and reoliced their rates
TO what the commission ordered when
the carriers recognized the power OF
tie commission 10 fix contested rates.
they adjusted rates themselves In many
INSTANCES and so they would do IL again
IL this power were conferred.
This Is no new experiment At least
twenty-five States of the Union have
laws to control State railroad rates
ranging In power all the way from the
riyht TO fix all rates de novo- And
really what is the difference In principle
between the present law and the pro-
posed one so far as rate-making Is con-
cerned?
Much objection has been raised
against that provision of the Esch-
Townsend bill which says that the
rate fixed by the commission shall go
into operation within thirty days with
out regard 10 whether the order Is to be
reviewed by the court or not.
Wants Immediate Effect.
Now IL the order Is correct one
81 should go into immediate effect. and
II II is not. ii win be enjoined at the
instance of the carrier. and no law
could be framed which could take from
the court the right to protect property
against confscation. But the carriers
know that the commission will make
no order TO conhscate their property
When the commission exercised the
rate-makinE power, we are told that 80
per cent of it's orders were complied
with If ii can be trusted TO be right
in ninety cases out of one hundred we
can assume II will be right In all until
reversed by the court, and especially
with the carriers in possession of the
inalienable right TO protection to life,
liberty, and property
In conclusion Representative Town
send added:
THE bill which passed the House last
February Is most conservative. the most
20 probably OF any bill which will ever
pass that body. The demands OF the
people win never be less"