New-York tribune., 1907-05-10
FOR BROAD COURT REVIEUy
only Point on Which Corporations
Agree-Page's Earnest 1ppeal.
lBy Telegraph to The Tribune.

llSy Telegram The Tribune
Albany May 9-That there should be a broad
court review was the only point on which corpora
hon interests agreed the conference of business
men held In tho City Hall here to-day at the nvi-
tatIon OF the Albany Chamber of Commerce To dis
cuss the public utilities bill. Two representatives
OF the New York Central Railroad Company who
h2d come here last night to argue for certain
amendments as delegates from an upstate cham
ber or commerce on reading tho papers this morn
ing Immediately went away without attending the
conference What's the use?" they disgusedly in
qufed Il reckon we know when we are beaten
lhls incident is significant of the feeling in Al
pahy OF the confidence that exists both among the
legislators and tho people that nothing can prevent
,ie ldssase or this measure, that public opinion
has demanded.
Senator Page exnlained tho hill, q. +,o s.,,
VINO stayed. Annoyed Mt the constant statements
OF corporation representatives that they favored
the bill' while at the time they were pro-
posing enlascuatng amendments the Senator lost
patience and addressed the conference in language
pTlef and 10 the point lie said he regretted that
no concrete proposition had been offered
Mr. Pierce. who represents the Buffalo Chamber
oi commerce. has said,' continued the Senator
that the bill repealed every constitutional guar
anty Of citizenship and deprived corporations Of
their inalienable rights while Mr. Harris repre-
senting the New York Central lines. said that the
bill was what the railroads wanted, with certain
exceptions and finally Mr.. Shepard repre-
sents the Pennsylvania Railroad. spent three
fourths of his time in discussing the Elsberg Rapid
Transit bill. Now, If you want discussion of the
question TO fashion why isn't there a
concrete proposition set forth?
rs 1t fair TO say there is power OF review? II
any constitutional question is involved If IN any
way this commission seeks 10 take away the prop
erty of any railroad company. II it denies equal
protection OF the laws. there IS a proceeding in
equity-a suit for injunction in which the
United States courts and the courts have
granted preliminary injunctons time out of mind
Is x fair TO say that have not re-enacted the
rules OF the OF the United States-hose pro-
visions of the law that provides for iniunctions?
Is there word in this bill from Section TO Sec
tion 81 that says court shall review limits in
any way the power Of courts TO do so? What does
this canor mean for a court review? They want
TO put in this bill questions which judicial
and with which courts have nothing to do. You
have the power TO review judicial questions guar
anteed to you by the constitution and laws Of the
state, and those lawyers who have practised in
the courts know where to find the law by which
.he review is regulated
Senator Page. turning to the representatives Of
roads in forceful and concise language told
them why there need for utilities bill The
arralgrment was so that the railroad people
were for the time nonplusscd.
There would have been public service COM
mission" said ne, If the railroad companies and
those who control them had dealt fairly with the
public. There would have been necessity OF
putting clause in this bill giving the right TO pass
upon the capitalization OF the company If the stock
represented a dollars worth of property for every !
dollars worth of capitalization, This is fair and /
square proposition If the business transactions Of
these railroads companies such that they can |
not finance their enterprises because their proposi
tions cannot be submitted to investigation. tho
quicker they reform their methods Of finance the |
better Il will be for the people"
Senator Page discussed the question Of holding !
companies He said that the practice had been TO I
take the stock other companies and reissue il at
two or three times the amount OF It's Vaiue. ana ,
that il the watering of stock was regarded as a /
good thing by all means water it, but that II stock I
is he based its intrinsic value, stock holding
should he done away with.
1T may he that ] anarchist, said he: 1T ;
may be that have become Wild-eyed socialist; .
but if you think that dollars worth Of stock
should not have dollars worth of value, you /
call anarchistfC."
AS a parting shot the Senator advised the cor /
porations and their paid attorneys to put their (
10 the ground and get in touch with public senti-
ment. the various political bodies throughout the
state, which have indOrSed the bill, have done.
terestS. said the steam road companies made !
TO suffer on account OF the street railroad system |
IN New York City. "1f Ryan and Belmont had not /
seen fit TO have 4 merger said he. Il take II we
should not have heard of this bin. The steam
roads do not want 10 stocks they are not in
terested in holding companies. Why should our
Improvements be throtted because of conditions
that 90 not affect us?"
Mr.. SheDard warted n court review and wanted
he commissioners put on the same plane judges
He insisted that efforts were being made TO sfife
criticism and that the objection 10 hay-
ing the bill discussed was an act of dsloyalty 10
The state.
Albert II. Harris general counsel for the New
\ IoriI Central. and Henry !. Pierce, Of Buffalo |
argued against various provisions Of the bill 7
Aspinwall Hodge and Senator Brush of tho !
Brooklyn League. advocated it.