The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-09-21
C.LELAND is MAD
He Would Abolish the State
Railroad Commission
Says the Board Is Not Worth
What 1t Costs.
GIVE JACKSON POWER.
Proposed to Add Railroad Bu-
reau to Legal Department.
Have Another Special Assistant
Attorney General.

islature it is considered possible that
an effort will be made to pass repeal
ing act abolishing entirely the state
board of railroad commissioners, attor-
ney for the board, and all the various
clerks and assistants of that body
This plan is advocated by Cyrus Le-
land. and Leland is for the plan be
cause he says the board of railroad COM
Inissicners does nothing OF any value
to the state, and is a very heavy ex-
pense-
What's the USE" said Mr.. Leland
yesterday. of having a board of rail-
road commissioners when we have to
call a special session of the legislature to
do the work the board is supposed to do?
What's the use of appropriating thou
sands of dollars to high priced officials
and mysterious experts and get moth
ing in return? For my part, 1 say
abolish the whole thing
There are no members of the railroad
commission N Topeka today, and Mr.
Leland's plan could not be presented to
them for their comments. 1t can be
stated, however, that the beard of rail-
road commissioners now holding office
the majority of the board, at least-are
well satisfied with the work they have
been doing. They say that they have
settled scores of cases without any con-
test, and thereby saved much time and
expense, and avoided any bitterness on
the part of the railroad companies.
In6Y say tnaI they now are ABOUT TO
promulgate a new schedule of freight
tariffs completely revising all the ex-
listing freight tariffs.
On the other hand, the enemies of the
board say that the policy of the ma
jority of the members of the board has
been to dodge all conflict with the rail-
roads. They contend that the board
did not begin track inspection until
forced to do so by the disclosures of
Jake Sheppard of Fort Scott; they say
that the board did not order the bull
letining of time or trains until their
hand was forced by Frank Ryan, the
minority member. They say that the
board delayed action in the Kansas
City terminal law for an unreasonable
length of time; that the board has fail
ed entirely to take any steps toward
securing an accurate valuation on all
the railroad property located or used
IN the state of Kansas; they say that
the board does not put in enough time
attending to the business of the state;
and they put on the cap sheaf by de-
claring that the board fatty turned
down the two cent fare proposition, on
the advise of their attorney, and would
have ended all discussion on that SUBJ
5ect then and there had not the gov
ernor come to the front with a sting
ing letter of rebuke and a threat of a
special session of the legislature.
Kansas made liberal appropriation
for its railroad commission at the last
session of the legislature. total of
S64.230 was voted for the support of
y
to the back salary allowed to Carr w.
Taylor. eX-attorney for the board, and
a $1,000 sum allowed for court ex-
penses in the federal court. OF this
$4,000, $4,000 was for salaries for
the commissioners, attorney and
clerks. and $4,000 was a contingent
fund to be used in hiring attorneys.
experts. engineers, and paying witness
fees. The legislature thought that
would be a sufficient sum to carry out
the work entrusted to the board, but
the board says that it is not enough.
The board contends that they have not
nearly enough funds to even make a
start on securing the valuation of
Kansas railroads.
What Would Take Its Place?
In case the legislature, in its wisdom,
should see fit to abolish the state board |
of railroad commissioners. the next /
question would be how to protect the in |
terests of the state in handling the rail- |
road matters which arise. 1t is pro-
posed that as a substitute for the board !
of railroad commissioners, a special |
bureau be created under the attorney
general of the state and that an attor- |
ney be secured to devote his entire time l
to the railroad situation. The attorney |
general would be authorized to employ /
all the experts, traffic men, freight men. |
engineers. etc. that he needs, as he is 1
now allowed to employ agents to get in |
formation for his antitrust prosecutions |
and MS liquor law suits.
BY placing the matter directly under |
the charge of the attorney general, it |
is claimed that time and money would 1
be saved and the state would get bet
ter results. AS 1t now stands, the rail- |
road commission has no executive auth |
GRITTY whatever. 1t can make orders |
and issue commands. but it is power
less to enforce them. The only way for |
It to enforce its orders is to appeal to |
the courts. The attorney general would /
dispense with the formality of the board |
and appeal to the courts direct. The |
attorney general through his special /
reau, would simply decide what cases
were worth taking into court. In this
way, he would to a certain extent sit |
in Judgment over the case as the coun-
~ attorney does before he issues a
complaint for the arrest of a party ac-
cused of crime If the county attorney
believes that the evidence is not strong
enough to give ground for belief that a
conviction can be secured, he has a
right to refuse the complaint The at
torney general would act in a similar
capacity in issuing complaints against
How the Plan Has Been Received.
This proposition advanced by CIV
Leland, and which is known to meet
with the approval of a number of
other prominent politicians and Iegis- |
lators in the state. for the adjustment
of the board of railroad commission
ers. created an endless amount of dis
cussion around the state house this |
morning, although state officials, and
the politicians about were a little
chary in expressing their views for
publication.
''If the railroad commission had
Eas would be better off than at pres