The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-11-26

Prom CORES lr.ii4riAt
WASLlNGIDN. November An
early decision ty the Supreme Court a.
20 the coustltutionauty II the rate max
Ing provision Of the Hepburn law may
be ONE ~ the results ~ the action OK
the Interstate Commerce Commission Ia
re0penlug tne 1--we stock rate case
This case ls based on a complaint filed
bv the Cattle Ealsers' Association OF
Texas against rates on live cattle from
he Texas ranges to TIE Northern feec o.
.ng grounds and rates from Texas and
The Northern territory O. the markets
l the neat-packlng cities. Practically
,f.ry rate ou 1--WE cattle lu thc whole
region west of Chicago and the n ssls-
sirpl River. and between the Northern
pacidc Railroad and the Texas quaran-
.ine nne is involved. either directly or
indirectly. and all the important rail-
roads IN -he West except the northern
Pacific aad the Great Northern. are made
aef-ndants
Rates Are Unjust"
The allegation of the petition IS that the
rates complained . are unjust and urrea-
F0na1i-. special complaint being made ot
general advance ln live stock rates al
thr0ugh tlis territory in 1916 An enor-
mols mass of testimony was submitted
bt both sides and tie commission on Au-
Elst IS 1913. announced decision in
Rnicl .t was held mat "tae advances IN
l.e stock rates during 1850 were unjust
and unre asnnahIe and that the existing
rates were lu- lst and Unreasonable 70 the
extent o. such ahEancee- When this de
.islon was announced the cattle Rasers
Assoclauon entered a motion for add
tlouai and more specific findings and
final order Was not issued. but the case
VAS allowed 90 rest until the Hepburn Jaw
Rad been passed when motion 70 re
Bpen was made
The case having been reopened. the
f.H.ra sd. Nrraf
additional testimony will be received.
RnG that the whole record VIII be re-
examined hy the commission for pro-
cedure under tic new sectlon-l5-of the
l.u. tte rlte-makinE section Unless
the railroads can show a substantial
cirerenre 81 conditions since August is.
1905 there ls lfLe doubt that the COM
mission VIII reafirm SIS FORMER decision
and Issue an order prescribing the rates
81 effect prior % the advance % 1903
as the maximum that may be charged.
such an order would reduce the receipts
% the roads from 1--we stock traffic an
average 90 several dollars a car. anu
would make such inroads In the gross
receipts u the cattle-carrying roads that
r. is nor probable that IL would be sub
rnitred 20 without a contest ia the courts
rhat would involve every legal and con-
stitutional question that could be raised,
the most important being the constitu-
tionallty OF the rate-maklng provision
OF the law.
Cost Of the Service.
The original decision of the commits
sion was based largely on its conclusions
as 10 the cost OF the service. The ship
pors contended that even the rates in
force prior 10 the advances OF 1919 were
too high. and the railroads contended
that. even after those advances the rates
we're too low A great deal Of testimony
as 20 the cost OF the service was sub
Tuitted by both sides. The railroads con-
tended that cattle rates were made low
at the beginning OF the competition OF
droyers. and that. Notwithstanding the
advances after the disappearance OF this
competitor they We're stiN too low. Elab-
crate statistics We're presented by the
Atchison. Topeka and Santa Fe to show
that the live stock traffic on that road
failed 10 pay its proportonate share Of
the cost OF operation. The former opinion
BY the commission has shown the rail
road lawyers what the commission re-
garded as the weak points ~ this case.
They Will now have an opportunity to
strengthen those points. and wiz doubtless
submit testimony to show a considerable
advance IN operating cost. since the for
rner testimony was taken. due 10 higher
wages and increased cost Of equipment
faH .F oil