The weekly true Democrat. (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1905-1912, 1905-12-08
cOYERNnENr RATE.riAKINc.


into print" in Washington newspaper
interview, with the somewhat thread
bare statement that he did not think
there could be "any doubt about the
constitutional powers of Congress to
legislate upon the subject of railway
rates and regulate the same" OF
course not. The mere existence of the
interstate commerce law and commits
sion demonstrates this. But the ques-
ton that is to confront Congress does
not involve the regulation of transport
tation rates. 1t is, whether Congress
can, or should, confer upon the inter-
state commission the poVer to make
rates.
This is prerogative which the COM
mission has long desired to exercise. 1t
has endeavored TO do so on several oc-
casions, but has been invariably turned
down upon the proposition by the courts.
Now it proposes TO go behind the courts
and seek from the Congress, by arbi-
trary enactment, that which the courts
have heretofore uniformly denied.
Which is right, the courts or the COM
mission?
Which is right, the courts or Con-
gresham Lamar?
Commissioner Prouty, in arguing for
the enlargement of the powers of the
commission, announced as the concrete
attitude of that body on the subject the
creation Of fourth branch of govern
mental authority--in addition to the ex.
ecutive, legislative and judicial func-
tions of government under our existing
system "a Dispensing Power in the
United States;" and his definition of
this unique element shows it to consist
of an arbitrary and irresponsible organ
ization, absolutely Independent of the
three existing branches of government,
and having imperial power to dominate
the entire business o. Interstate trans !
portation at will, uncontrolled by the |,
courts and responsible to no superior
There is no business in this country
which is more completely the subject of
legal restraint than is that of railroad |
transportation, says a recent writer,
Mr.. Joseph Nimmo, Jr., of Washing
ton, d. c., in thoughtful and convinc-
ing brochure, a copy of which has just
come to our hands. THE railroads are
regulated by States, by cities, counties,
towns, village boards of trustees, school
districts, and by almost every other po-
litical subdivision Of the State, The !
law of the common carrier and of the
public highway and the decisions of the
courts also embrace volumes of regula- !
ton applicable to the conduct of rail-
road transportation, while the act to
regulate commerce as amended ampli-
fies, extends and particularizes the reg
ulative principles of the common law as
developed in its application to the rail-
roads. +"
While the aggregate freight transac-
tons in the United States during the
eighteen years of the existence of the
Interstate Commerce Commission num-
Der approximately three thousand mil
lions, the total number of cases consid-
cred by the commission was about 40, |
of which IS were appealed to the courts,
and in only 8 of these appeals was the
position of TIE commission sustained.
The overriding of the commissions de-
cisions in the other 81 cases appears to
constitute the entire grievance of the
commission. 1t takes no account Of the
1928 cases in which its decisions on
questions Of transportations were not
disturbed or complained of-970 of the
total never reaching final hearing.
With such record, can it be said
that regulation is a failure? Or that
new and unheard-of elements of gov
ornamental control should be injected
into our traditional system for the sole
purpose of enabling this commission to
ignore the courts and all other estab-
lished departments of government and
get even" with the courts for the 81
errors that it attempted in the admins
tration of the interstate commerce law?
The desperate need of the Republican
party for an Issue" may invoke the
official influence ot the President in the
adoption of the purely populistic and
Il. L. - 4