The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-11-24
NOT MONEY ALONE,

A square issue is likely 10 he pre-.
sented IN the courts on the ruling of
the Interstate Commerce commission
that 1T is unlawful for newspapers and
railroad companies TO contract for ad-
vertising, and take paw in trausporta-
tion. IT is held by the commission
that nothing but payment in money
IN each case can meet the requirements
OF the law. Which is manifestly d
ruling that cannot stand.
Let US look at the matter little.
newspaper advertises for railroad
company. The rule would require that
the newspaper shall present its bill,
receive the money over the counter,
then push the money back in pay
for a railroad ticket or a mileage book.
Or IN reverse that the newspaper
shall pay cash for 3 ticket or mileage
book, and the railroad Office shall push
the money back in payment of a
bill for advertising. That is, form
must be gone through which has no
substance; pretense must be kept
w; the parties can do by means of
an open fiction what they are for
bidden to do under the rule.
Take another case: man grants
right of way over his land in con
sideration Of 4 permanent right to
ride where and when he pleases over
the road. 1t is satisfactory ar
rangsment to the land owner, and the
company is content, for it really pays
nothing; as its trains run regularly,
1t may as well carry the grantor of
the right.of way as not; this road has
bought right Of way FOR transporta-
tion, no money is Ill the consideration,
nor is there intended TO be. Why
should not the land owner be permitted
TO sell and the railroad to buy, on
terms mutually satisfactory. even
though no money passes either way7
To hold that nothing but money pay
ment will do is TO deprive both parties
of their natural right of bargain and
sale, and to forbid them entering into
contract which iu no way inyades
any public right.
Again, suppose a railroad compa ny
wants TO reward one who has prevented
by timely warning an accident that
might be more or less severe, and
The one who has rendered the service
prefers transportation unlimited to
limited money payment, why should
it be held that money alone can com
pensate? Laws meant for the relief
of the people should not be so con-
strued as to introduce restrictions upon
contracts, or service, or payment,
where each party 10 the matter is con.
tent
The attorneys for the Monou route
have notified the Commission that they
do not find in the law any restriction
such as the Commission seeks to i'm
pose as between their company and the
newspapers. They say that they have
made contracts. and are making more.
with the newspapers, for the advertis.
ing of their time schedules; and that
they intend to fulfill these contracts.
When they are intefered with In the
carrying out of these contracts, the
1"NN'N 'iii pS VIZ, Gnu IU' ODlIP0
States Supreme Court will be called on
to decide the controversy. But il is
not likely that they will be iuterfered
with; the case is too plain. From the
railroad standpoint, the companies are
clearly entitled TO receive for transpor-
tatlon whatever equivalent they con-
sider sufficient, whether in advertising
or IN other service, provided only that
they enforce their published rates:
while the newspapers may receive
whatever they please as equivalent for
advertising and subscription, from cash
to railroad transportation, or pumpkin
pies. In their case, also, the rule
should prevail, that current and adj.
vertised rates should not be departed
from; this in Justice 10 all who sub
scribe or advertise And when this is
done all around, and every party TO
the transaction is satisfied, there is no
law nor power that can say that money
alone must stand for the payments
which the contracts require to be
made.