Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1906-04-13

the court had both decided that rate
was unjust and unreasonable and would
not be allowed to stand, the carrier
would naturally endeavor to establish
rate that would relieve him from further
complaint.
Senator Elkins criticised the Hepburn
bill. showing that it does not prohibit
carriers from competing with the BUSH
ness of shippers; that it does not require
railroad companies to put in switches
where necessary; does not compel con-
nections and prorating with connecting
and lateral lines. and does not compel the
fair distribution of cars between shippers.
These he considers of the highest impor-
lance.
He dwelt at great length on the sub
iect of differentials, which, he claims, is
placed under the control of the commits
sion by the Hepburn bill, although the
advocates of the bill do not admit it. He
believes the railroad companies them
selves can better adjust differentials with
reference to the just rights of different
localities than can be done by any other
authority. He comedies the importance
of the establishment of through routes of
travel and transportation, and of through
rates for the same, but regards as entirely
impracticable the provision for 1t in the
Hepburn bill.
He distinguishes between government
regulation of railroads and government
management. He would limit the regu-
lation to the ascertainment and enforce
ment of the rights of all parties. To go
beyond this and place the management
of the business of railroads in the hands
of government officials might lead event.
ually to government ownership. He
thinks the time might come when the
railroad companies would Join hands
with their pronounced enemies in per-
hitting government ownership of the
roads which they were prohibited by law
| from managing for themselves. He de-
scribed the difficulties of rate making
and said that the railroad managers
themselves were compelled to trust to the
Judgment and experience of traffic man.
ayers, and that these officials were COM
PEELED to govern themselves by market
conditions. He thought that rates, like
the weather, could be recorded, but not
made.
| He discussed very deliberately the SUBJ
ject of court review, including the power
to issue temporary injunctions pending
such review. Space will not allow a
review of this portion of his speech. A
reading of it will show that Mr.. Elkins
has thoroughly studied the legal aspects
of the question. He has very clear views
on the subject which are very clearly
expressed. He thought there was wide
margin between the highest reasonable
rate and the lowest one short of confisca-
ton. Congress alone, he said, could
exercise the discretion of fixing the rates
between these extremes. 1t could not
transfer this discretion to the commission,
but it could establish a standard to which
the commission must adhere.
He criticised the provisions in the Hep
burn bill giving the commission the power
to establish fairly remunerative rates"
and to do things which sin its opinion
were necessary. Such an attempt to grant
| legislative discretion to the commission,
he said, made the bill unconstitutional.
He called attention to the fact that the
bill provides no method of procedure by
which the carrier can himself initiate a
movement for relief in court against
an order of the commission.
He stated that an act of Congress was
subject to the veto of the President, but
that the commission was given unlimited
power, with no power lodged anywhere
for a veto of its orders.
The speech of the Senator is a very
strong statement and argument by very
strong man well equipped with a knowl-
edge of his subject and inspired by a
desire to aid in the enactment of law
which will be undoubtedly constitutional
and under which abuses in the railroad
system can be punished, and the rights
of shippers, carriers and consumers given
the protection to which all persons and
all classes are entitled.