Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-04-03

ness by the delaware and HUDSON kali
road Company, which had set up a retail
business of its own.
Mr. Tillman represented the letter as
lashlight on new phase of the coal s;tua-
ton. This road is one of the five engaged
nthe coal business" he said. Not salts
fled with monopolizing the production and
transportation of coal, it now engages in
the retail business
Mr.. Hale protested against the daily In
PRODUCTION of these letters II don't OBJ
ject, he said, but l think the senator is
about even"
Mr. Tillman protested that he had no pur-
pose OF getting even, and that he was
actuated by no malice IN his course 1T
is valuable idea. and l think ought to
follow IL up, he said
When the colloGuy ceased there was a
tacit understanding that the daily presenta-
ton of the letters of this character by the
South Carolina senator would soon cease.
The Anti-Hazing Bill.
The conference report on the hazing bill
was agreed to without discussion
When the employers liability bill which
yesterday passed the House. was referred
by the Vice President to the committee on
interstate commerce Mr.. Martin expressed
the hope that the committee would take
prompt action in order that the Senate.
might have u report either for or against
the bill so that it might have an oppor-
tunity to act.
Inc conference report on the Dill for the
adjustment of the affairs of the five civiliz-
ed tribes of Indians was again laid before
the Senate and Mr.. Patterson opposed Its
acceptance. He took especial exception to
the provision In the bill relating to the
enrolment OF the former slaves of the In
dams, freedmen. contending that they
should be permitted to establish their
status by competent evidence and that
documentary evidence should not be re-
qured as the language of the bill now
provides
The conference report was laid aside
without action and the railroad rate bill
floor 10 address the Senate on that SUBJ
iect,
Judicial Review Of Rates.
Mr.. Long traced the development of the
doctrine OF the judicial review of rates
made by law and showed that rates OF a
commission could not be made final beyond
the power OF the court to inquire into GER
tain questions in relation TO them He con
tended that the decisions of the Supreme
Court clearly showed that before court
Will set aside rate made by legislative
authority, It must clearly appear that the
rate IS so unjust or so unreasonable as to
amount TO taking property without Just
compensation; that the courts win only In
terfere with rates made by legislative all-
thority when they are confiscatory and they
have defined coniiscatory rates to be those
which do not give fair return on the prop
erty employed In performing the service
Rates could not bs fixed so low by Con-
gress or by a commission, said Mr. Long,
as to leave the property of the carrier in
the hands of the owner without any re-
Enumeration for it's use. 1t is judicial ques-
ton, he said. to determine whether the
maximum rate fixed by the commission
permitted a fair return the property en-
pIoyed in performing the service. and Con-
gress could not and should not interfere
with this judicial function. He declared
haF all rights of the carrier nm
ply protected under the present Jurisdiction
of the court which would not be restricted
or enlarged by this bill
Mr.. Long agreed with Mr.. Knox that a
bill comforting the duty on the commits
sion TO set aside challenged rate and sub
stitute maximum limit beyond which the
carrier could not go in fixing It's future
rate could be drawn one of two theo-
ries: That the order of the commission was
Anal; or that 1t contemplated n review OF
the commissions order by the court The
BILL he said was drawn upon the theory
that the court would review the order, but
the question how far court could
so now In reviewing an order Of the COM
mission and how far II would go IL pro-
vision for review was placed In the bill
Reason for the Amendment.
Mr.. Long stated that he would not take
the Inconsistent position of contending that
provision for review Is now In the bill. and
yet was unwilling to express such review
by an appropriate amendment. For this
reason he had offered the amendment de-
ciced upon at the White House conference.
He agreed with the senator from Pennsyi-
vania that there should be no question OF
the right of the carrier that had been in
iured by an order of the commission to
sue the commission in the United States
circuit court, and stated that while he was
satisfied with the House bill In this par
tieular yet In order to remove all ques-
tions as to Its constitutionality he offered
the amendment giving the right to sue the
commission In the United States court and
giving Jurisdiction to the court to hear and
determine the question whether the order
of the commission was beyond its authority
or in violation of the rights Of the carrier
secured by the Constitution. He believed
that the courts would assume this jurisdic-
ton under the bill as 1t was passed by the
House. and he did not favor eniarging their
present jurisdiction.
Mr.. Long read extracts from the speeches
OF Senators Lodge and Foraker, showing
that they desired to broaden the review