Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1906-10-05
EDITORS PROTEST.
CALL LATEST RULING OF CON-
MERGE COMMISSION UNFAIR.
RAILROAD ADS BARRED.
Say There is Nothing In the Law
That Calls for Such an lnterpre-
tatlon - The Commission
Flooded with "kicks."

Washington.-The recent ruling of
the interstate commerce commission
TO the effect that nothing but money
can be paid for transportation of
either persons or property" means
that in future the railroads will be
prohibited from exchanging transpor-
tation for advertising space in the
newspapers of the country.
The ruling has already aroused a
storm of protest from the publishers
throughout the country. Every mail
into Washington brings hundreds of
letters from newspaper men all of
which severely criticise the commits
sion for going out of it s way to hit
the newspapers" The publishers in
sist that there is nothing in the new
law which would in any way forbid
the railroads from purchasing adver-
tising space to be paid for in trans
portation, and that such ruling is
not only uncalled for by either the
letter or the spirit of the law, but is
unconstitutional as we'll.
One prominent publisher said day
or two ago:
| ucTS ID uOt only uothln5 III lhC
new rate law which would call for
such a ruling as this from the COM
mission, but the ruling is antagonistic
to the national constitution as well.
and it will not be upheld by the
courts. The railroads that desire pub
licity through the medium of my pub
lication make advertising contracts
with me, and pay me for the space
used with transportation which is the
same as money to me as it is used by
myself or my employees in connection
with my business. The government
might with equal justice say the mer-
chant could not give dry goods or
any other marketable commodity in
exchange for advertising space. The
courts would not uphold such ruling
as that for one moment, and there is
no more reason why they should up
hold this latest erration of the COM
merce commission, for it is equally as
untenable as the proposition between
the publisher and the merchant
would be.
Everyone knows that the railroads
do, and can afford to, advertise more
heavily when their advertising ac-
counts can be paid for in transporta-
ton. Nor does this increased amount
of advertising affect the interests of
the general public in any way, but
it does assist in making the prosperity
of the American newspapers and peri
odicals. The transportation that is
given to newspapers in exchange for
advertising does not affect in any way
the equitable enforcement of the rate
law, nor does it affect in any way the
rates charged the general public for
transportation for either persons or
property. 1t is benefit to the rail-
roads in that 1t enables them to do a
greater amount of advertising that
they otherwise could or would do, and
in this way secure a greater amount
of business for their lines, and under
a Just Interpretation of the law this
increase in business would eventually
lead to a reduction of transportation
charges to the general public. 1t is
an unjust and uncalled fer ruling, and
both the publishers and the railroads
should fight it."
That publishers are fighting it, not
only by their protests to the commits
sion but by protesting to their repre-
sentatives in both houses of congress
is proven by the fact that already the
commission is receiving communica.
tions from many senators and con-
gressmen in which these representa-
tives Of the people declare they had
no intention Of passing a law that
would affect the newspapers in this
way. and that there is nothing in the
new law which calls for such ruling
on the part of the commission.