New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-04-22
LETTERS TO THE EDTTOp
FRANK HENDRICK ON UTILITIES Rrrr
Calls 1t Unconstitutional - Reeommsus,
Massachusetts, Plan.
the Editor Of Tho Tribune

To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir: TIE Public Utilities bill Is drawn ,-t.,
inexcUsable disregard OF the simplest nrJ,e,-, aa
constitutional law and Of the pIainest I q
many years of experience in the state rse,-. .,
Of corporations Being fundamentally unco1-.,.' a
tiOnal it WILL il enacted. not be law ana - =
repeals all other law upon the subject il nm =
ate lamentable condition. for which tbos. -
should know better viii probably in the mean ,s W.
receive. not blame. but political advancement t s
hopeful and trusting. but deIuded and berr.---
people" 'seas
large proportion Of the testimony i,tros-
on behalf Of the State OF New York and ~ -
City Of New York in the hearings before the -
Ter IN the case OF the Consolidated Gas ComusTv
against the state Gas Commission was dirao.os !.
showing that in the cities Of AIassacbuqott - -
price Of gas was voluntarily reduced by the 60
panies upon the recommendation OF the ,ysg -
mtsstoners. And everybody knows that the 49,,
Of the Massachusetts Railroad Commission -
long been model of effectiveness. Yet both -
these commissions are advisory comrSissoySss
without power That system introduced bv =
Francis Adams. almost forty years ago wouI5 :
ADOPTED IN every state and by the United States
fession IN the control Of public service Corporate
as 5 Sluiln government S can ever hope to attain
pu1hc property by private corporations and The ~
and should remain within local eoeniN S,sa
they touch localities and citizens where theV Tsv.
interests peculiarly important and peculiarly fRs,s
own But wat does the Public Utilities bin 49,
IL SEEDS a case based upon the first and evs~S
subsequent act Of the commissioners on the ts7iS-
Journey TO the Supreme Court OF the United States
10 talk about the inefiCiency Of judicial coTT-Sf
IS 70 talk against all government control T-sa
courts can review any act OF public official yno5
the complaint of one who asserts that his pTonertt
Is taken under color Of statutory authority P1s
the power exercised is judicial power and the o1Iv
order which binds the public service CORPORATE
against It's viii is the order OF the court an ~
only place that the commission have IN coUrs
Is that of plaintiff respondent
Under the Public Utilities bill the railroads MIN
have the great advantage. moving parties -
preparing the issue. The issue framed by ne AN
roads is purely objection TO the individual ~.
ton OF an official who asserts statutory authorize
Few such acts are unaSsaable on cOnsrif1tio-si
grounds In Massachusetts the proceedinG r.
purely an enforcement Of law, and where th3f ii
done It stays done.
Forty years ago the commission begged tas
Legislature not TO give II power. The Tes1lt n
that they have never been suspected OF heinz h
part Of a personal political machine and 6ay7-e
the substance of power in the possession OF rIhliS
confidence, they have never asked for the shadow
Everything that has been said in favor ~ IN.
Public Utilities bill may be found in Mr. PrFsr's
unsuccessful argument in the now famous cas- al
SEnyth agt. Anes. FRANK HENDRICK.
No. 120 Broadway, New York City. April ~ iSgT.