New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-03-29
THE UTILITIES BILL HEARING.


AT the hearing on the Public Utilities bill the
counsel for the public service corporations as
gumed an attitude toward it which entities their
arguments to respectful consideration, for they
frankly declared their adhesion to it's general
principles and restricted themselves to straight
forward criticism OF its details. Speaking with
q larger knowledge of the probable practical
workings Of the bill than any OF its legislative
supporters or critics, they are in a position to
point out practical defects, and their suggestions
for it's amendment should not be interpreted as
inspired by a desire to draw the teeth" OF the
measure. The amendments suggested would les
sen considerably the proposed powers Of the
commissions, but they would still retain large
authority to regulate the public service corpora
tons Some amendments will probably be found
necessary, for no one would maintain that the
bill is a perfect one but il seems to that the
corporations are unduy nervous over some Of
its provisions.
The question whether the commissioners
should be removable without the consent OF the
Senate is probably not one Of practical impOr-
lance to the corporations If radical or dan
gerous man is elected to the GOvernOrship
we shall wish he had not the power Of removal.
When such a man has filled the commissions
with his followers and when a sane Governor
is chosen TO succeed him we shsll desire that he
have that power We believe that the best re-
suits will be obtained by making the commits
sOners removable by the Governor, for that is
the lesson Of experience regarding commissioner
ships in this city and also of the Kelsey incident.
The question whether there shall be court
review OF the commissions rulings Is the old one
which was thrashed out IN connection with the
Interstate Commerce law The Utilities bill
does not prevent appeal to the courts, and
this means that every question that is properly
OF qo 10 PT1li n
volving a legal question-may be so appealed
To bring any other class Of questions before the
attention OF the courts seems to us improper.
The commissions will be administrative bodies
Most Of their rulings will be administrative and
TO make every one OF them subject TO court re-
view is to put the courts into the position Of
doing administrative work. The courts would
then be the real public service commissions and
whereas the commissioners will presumably be
experts in regard TO public service corporations,
the real determination Of the states policy
would not be in their hands, but in the hands of
the courts. which are not expert in such ques-
tions. No arbitrary. oppressive or cOnfscatory
action could be taken by the commissions, for
the courts as the bill stands would interfere to
restrain Them and this, IL seems to us, will af-
ford 10 the corporations a sufficient defence Of
their property rights.
Mr.. Edward ~. Shepard in his address called
\ altentlon ID INC large powers OF the propoSeu
commissions over questions Of railroad admins
tratlOn, the issue Of securities, the adequacy Of
train service, the number and competency Of
employees, etc. IL it should be shown that these
] provisions Of the law were likely to operate OPP
pressively In any way or to hamper the man
agement Of corporations without any real pub
lie gain. the bill should certainly be amended In
such respects. but when the principle Of rate
regulation is accepted by the corporations and
the right OF the state 10 insist upon adequate
serylce-for we apprehend this too is admitted
the regulation Of securities issues and super
vision TO secure the manning of trains with COM
petent employees are not a long STEP They rest
upon the sans bass-a clearer conception and q