The Saint Paul globe., 1905-01-24
COMMISSION MUST
EXPLA AIN It's CODE
Continued From First Page

ana ASns commission, the state militia,
the railroad and warehouse depart
| ment, the dairy and food department,
all these departments of state govern-
| ment are marshaling their forces to.
either amend or defeat features pro-
posed by the new code for their inn
mediate departments. The insurance
companies, the railroad companies, the
| judges of the district courts, county
| officers in a number of counties and
city officials in cases where they are
acting under laws fixing their COM
pensation by population or assessed
valuation of their municipalities, ali
have been heard from in no uncertain
tone.
Members of the commission admit
| nuTpbers of errors, and in other cases
defend their action in revising the
statutes to meet present conditions
The members of the commission have
agreed not to be drawn into newspaper
controversies. and decline to be inter-
| viewed in answering charges made
against the commission. They admit
their readiness, however, to appear be-
fore the legislative committees to ex-.
plain and defend sections of the new
code against which objection has been
filed by the people interested.
What Revision Costs
The books of the state auditor show
that of the appropriation of $4,000 for
the revision of the statutes. a total of
$67, 1860 has been expended, leaving
balance of $17,233 to pay for the edit
ing, annotating and printing of the re-
vised code. This sum will scarcely be
sufficient and an additional appropria-
ton will have to be made if the state
prints any considerable number of
copies of the code when finally revised
II. f. Stevens, the first president of the
commission, is shown to have drawn
$13,788.12 for his services. Daniel Fish,
the present president, is charged with
| $1S,740.S9; M. r. Tyler, S851423, and
ffF. j. Knox, $13,78S.13. Other sums were
spent in clerk hire, stenographers' fees,
and the bill of the West Publishing
| company, for editorial work, of $7,57475
makes up the total
| Deny Attempting New Law
That the code commission has at
tempted to enact a distance tariff law
to apply to the railroads of Minnesota
| is disputed by members of the commits
sion. They declare that simply the
| phraseology of the law of 1887, regu-'
latIng the long and short haul, has been
changed, and that this will not have the
effect of changing the law itself.
The old law provided that common
carrier should mot charge or receive
any greater compensation for shorter.
| than for longer distance, but a. sec
ond clause said, 'but this shall not be
construed to authorize common car
rier, subject to the provisions of this
act, to charge as great a compensa-f
ton for shorter as for a longer dis
| tance."
The new law proposed by the com
mission declares that common car
rier shall not charge as much for
| shorter as for longer distance
A member of the commission said
yesterday that the intent was not to-
| change the effect of the law regulating
| rates, but only to put the language
employed in the old statute in more
concrete form.
The old law was ambiguous, the
commissioner said, "and ! believe that
| 1t was 'bungled, purposely. 1t said
substantially, when it's different
clauses were considered together, what
the commissions new long and short
haul enactment proposes, but it was
never enforced. No decisions were
ever given on the provision of the
statute of 1887, and the law has been
| a dead letter in this state
L. "
mission who was formerly a member
of the state railway and warehouse
commission, is said TO be the author,
| In conjunction with L. B. Everdell, of
| the revision of the code relating to-
| railroad rates.
Railroad Commissioners Talk
Members of the state railroad and
warehouse commission had had their.
attention called to the section of the
| code requiring pro rata rates for rail-.
road freights in Minnesota. Both Ira
B. Mills and Charles F. Staples, the
older members of the board, expressed
| surprise at the action of the code COM
mission in attempting to enact so
drastic measure regulating railroad
rates.
There was nothing ambiguous about
| the old law said Chairman Mills. "It
| is the law under which Minnesota rail-
roads have operated for many years.
It allows the longer line to meet the
competition of the shorter line, and
under the provision of the new code
| this will be no longer possible. ] re-
gard the code provision as very radical:
| legislation. | am not prepared to say.
| what the effect would be if it were put
into operation in this state. The ques-
! ton of it's wisdom is matter for legis-
| lative inquiry. 1t would not be proper
| for me to express an opinion unless it
| were asked for in an official way. L
| shall be glad to tell the legislature what
| I think Of the provision, if am asked
! to express an opinion, but 1t is not
proper subject for me to discuss with
| the public. We have received many
| inquiries today as to the effect of the
| provision on railroad tariffs.
Staples Is Emphatic
Commissioner Staples was quite en-
phatic in discussing the provision. My
advice to the legislature is to let we'll
enough alone" he said. .fUnder the old
| law We know exactly what we1can do in
| the matter of freight rates. I am not
prepared to say that Minnesota is ready
for the enactment of a distance tariff
law
Threatens Insurance Companies
Minnesota insurance interests have
discovered new provision in the stat
ute revision commissions code which,
insurance men say will work a serious
hardship on Minnesota companies do-.
ing business in other states.
The new requirement included in the
commissions code -enforces a per-.
centage tax on insurance carried in
Minnesota by foreign cesnpanies to de-
fray the cost of annual examinations
of the financial conditions of the v9ri-
Gus companies admitted to do business
in the state.
Under the insurance code in force in