The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1907-08-06

is another question upon which all
such state rate regulation has an
important bearing; which is the
conflict of the regulation itself with
that of interstate transportation by
After discussion of the
question Immediately inyoIyed" in
which it takes the position that
Governor Glenn has made q mis-
take In pursuing the course chosen
BY him, it turns TO the other and
says:
The other question brought con-
sp~icuously to light is not an issue in
this case, but 1t is one of far-reaching
consequence. The regulation of all
railway charges upon traffic within
the limits OF a single state by the
legislature of that state and its en-
forcement by state authorities has a
bearing upon the regulation OF in
terstate> Commerce which cannot
be long ignored. Such regulation
can take effect upon all freight rates
as we'll as upon passenger fares, and
in some states the maximum OF
freight charges has Deen definitely
prescribed. This authority may be
so exercised as to disarrange entirely
the the system of regulation by fed
eral authority. Suppose, for in
stance. that a line which passes
through several states and is engag-
ed largely in interstate as we'll as
intrastate traffic is subject to a re-
striction in one of these states that
makes its through charges or those
for transportation partly in other
states improbable at the rates pre-
viously imposed. 1t viii be compelled
to readjuSt these other rates in order
TO save itself from loss. For this its
schedules may have to be approved
by the interstate commits
sion: at least that BODY will have the
power to declare any of these rates
unreasonable and to prescribe a limit
to them. Will the reduced charges
within some one state be accepted
as a reason for increasing those in
other states, or on through traffic. TO
make up such loss. or can the matter
be rectified by forcing the state to
abandon its restriction? Can a state
regulate traffic within its jurisdiction
in a amer to burden all connecting
traffic outside of hat jurisdiction?
If one state can do this another ira
Versed by the same line or the the
same system may do it. and the
whole scheme of interstate regulation
may be upset and a matter already
sufficiently complicated may be
brown into a confusion worse on
founded.
This formidable question as to
the line between state and federal
regulation and as to which shall be
allowed to prevail where there is con
ftict, is raised by this contest in North
Carolina not for the first time. but in
a manner to give it serious import.
1t is thurst forward by every state
that undertakes to fix a limit to rates
upon traffic within its limits regard
less of the effect beyond it's limits,
and it forces upon the attention the
possible necessity of making COM
plete the national regulation regard
less of state lines. It helps the CEN
tralizing tendency which it is SO de-
sirab1e to counteract or restrain,
either by a~bstention from inter-
ference by state legislation or by its
wise direction in harmony or CO.
Liberation with national IFegislation.
If conflict is to be forced by unwise
state action. there is no manner Of
oouot as to which authority
must prevail in the end. for
tally national that it's regulation in
sections under forty or fifty con-
hicting authorities is out of the Dues
ton.
This means nothing more than
that there is danger of too rabid
state legislation on the subject of
railway rates leading to greater
federal control of railways-intra-
state as well as interstate. This
phase of the case is worthy of care
full and serious consideration.