New-York tribune., 1908-04-17
HARPER s. BROTHERS
NO DIVIDED AUTHORITY
DIR. C4RNEGIES TTEWS.
Control Of Common Carriers Should
Be Lodged zgith Commerce Board.

Washington, April 16-Hearings the National
Civic Federation bill to amend the Sherman anti
trust law were continued to-day before Chairman
Littlefeld's Subcommittee of the House judiciary
Committee Seth Low. president of the federation
submitted amendments to his bill. so changing its
provisions that the Interstate Commerce Comns-
sion, instead Of the President and the Commissioner
o. Corporations shall be the arbitrator of all mat
ters O. reference. designation and decision which
would arise under the operation OF the Dill MI
Low said these amendments had been agreed on as
likely meet and satisfy the most serious of the
objections thus far urged against the federation 3
measure. Mr.. Low laid before the committee a
letter from Andrew Carnegie in support Of the
proposed changes. Mr. Carnege's letter was writ
ten with the purpose OF supporting the idea that
authority should not be divided between the Inter
state Commerce Commission and other bodies or
other officials BIZ before taking up that point he
discussed other questions He conceded that it was
necessary for the government to exercise control
over common carriers engaged in interstate COM
rlerce and declared that this power should be
lodged in the Interstate Commerce Commission lie
suggested that industrial engaged in inter
state traffic should be similarly controlled and
proceeded as follows:
I cannot too strongly advise against there being
more tnan one authority pass upon such ques-
tions, and that should be the Interstate CoInnle5c
one commission and industrial interstate commerce
under the bureau OF corporatl9ns or anotner & con-
mission. there must arise tnvidious comparison pc
tween the two. Such comparisons Will oe pupiiCiS
posed 10 feel that the other takes more liberal
views, vice versa, and vent his disappolntrnen
Imagine two Supreme Courts The standing OF
both courts would De lowered. No reason why the
Interstate Commerce Commission should not deal
with the whole subject and every reason why II
should. Its members will get wider view or the
whole question in its different phases II IS really
question, two. We have seen, for instance.
that the steel rail question is much upon par with
the common carrier question both being eAcep-
tonal.
One point seems to be essential; without it little
general progress DE made, viz. When new
conbina tions proposed the first question must
always be, What is the object sought? In ninety
nine cases out of hundred It will undoubtedly
be 10 rob the community Of its right 10 the benefits
Of free competition disguise II as we may. there
proof that the application is to cover an excep-
tiOnsl The conditions must be peculiar, as
those of carriers and steel rail agreements
II not, the application should be denied. II
granted. then measures must be taken to safe
guard, 10 insure to the results that COM
That the combination be reasonable not sufficient
We doing pioneer work Just now. work that
this vast Union must do sooner or later, but the
history of the Supreme Court should lead to
press forward The Interstate Commerce
Commission has already made a much better start
than the Supreme Court did.
Henry TOwne, representing the Merchants As
sociatjon of New York opposed the Federation bill
Mr. Towne said the best course for Congress to
pursue would be TO appoint a competent commission
which in the recess shall collect evidence, study
the problem and report It's conclusions basis
for constructive legislation at the session Of Con-
gress which viii begin next December.