The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1910-03-17

I'hs Mitchell Capital
THURSDAY. MARcHl7. 1910.
sAuTIH DAKorA FREIGHT RATES.
NO !.
Granted that freight rates within
The state OF South Daota are too high.
how are they to be reduced? The
Sioux City Tribune has laid the re-
sponsibility for these rates at the
door Of the state railroad commission.
They are state rates and state rates
are under tie jurisdiction of the state
railroad commisaion. Therefore.
the tribune reasoned, all that is me-
cessary Is that the commission order
the rates reduced.
George k4ce Of Flandreau. member
Of the railroad commission, in an ex-
csptionally able article. sets forth the
difficulties In the path of the commits
sSSton. He realizes that South Dakota
rates are too high and4he pledges the
good faith Of the commission to on
unue1 enorts to put them down.
It must be borne In mind. when
considering the regulation Of railroad
rates. that the supreme court Of the
United States has established the test
e - applied by courts In passing
uponSrate reductions ordered by state
i government. Il IL considered the
constitutional right Of every railroad
Ito earn arsasonable return upon q
fair valuation OF Its property. Con-
SeQaently. Il would avail nothing for
tho railroad commission to order
lowsrSsouth Dakota freight rates un-
lsss 4 g prepared to prove In court
sthat these rates permit the railroad
companies % earn Z reasonable re-
~turn#from ! fair valuation Of their
properly. ~ order e do this. Of
eonrss; thescommisaion must have its
oWn valuation Of the railroad proper
ty. Twas toSthis end that the state
lsgisllature appropriated $4,000 for
the Valuation ofsthe railroad proper
withinaths state. This work. 40
Spording 70 Nj. Rice. q So per cont
complstsd ana. Incidentally, ct . cost
q mils sof athird 1ess than the Min
STANDARDIZATION.
AZ corn,mi,ission u explained BY
~ Rtce. = confronted ct the outset
4 system Is bookkeeping 81 the
railroad companies that u unfair TO
tkssstats. For sxaaraplls. ths swornsre-
lplsor4 u me Milwaukee and 81. Paul
railroad company 70 the commission
shsogxs net earnings Per mile g fol
b low:
Wgv1iscorsina .... 1. ..433.6ss.9s
Illinsois s.66o.87
Iowa l,56s.66
I Minnesota 6. 3.4s6.se
81 outh Dakota 1894
20 NissouTi q. 81. 3,692.s-
3r..sntceSSgtye what Is undoubted-
Nlyst he correct explanation Of this In
The following paragraph:
sThe#smal earnings Of the roads
sssin this state are simply a matter Of
III ook-keepfng. instance, the city
SS0f Canton is 680smiles from Chicago.
It SissSone mile from the Iowa state
line. FretghtHfrom Canton to Chicago
M reverse goessonesm mile In the state
SOf SouthsDakota, approximately 400
miles through the state Of Iowa and
IN noia. Whom $3.50 Ii paid at Canton
credited % the states q follows:
South Dakota3 100; Iowa. 1900;
Of coursa this same illustration
would apply 70 Sioux Falls. Brook
inaGr1sssWatertown. Of any other point
in he state. But the matter of cor
arsetIy apportioning earnings between
1llttastss becomes an interstate question
and therefore Is out Of the jurisdic-
tiitolnSsolIff the state railroad commission.
SsThisiaswhyth the state commission pur-
Notwithstanding an action before the
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. as soon as the
v1luationShas been completed. It will
@sthns seen that the fight for lower
Ilreigha rates Ia South Dakota has in
probability q number Of years To
rsnt.nlibefore results may be expected.
& Hut TINT Al allsthe more reason why
NfhsAstate commission should be per-
skent and Why # should have the