Newark evening star and Newark advertiser., 1910-02-21
HEARING TO-DAY ON
THREE IMPORTANT
UTILITIES BILLS
Municipal Corporations Commit
tee Considers Measures in AS
sembly Chamber Today.
SCHARFF, SULLIVAN AND
PIERCE ACTS TO COME UP
Senator Gebhardt's Bill Will
Not Be Passed on at
Meeting.
TFrom a STAR correspondentl |

lrTon a StaI 1ofrespondentI
TRENTON, Feb. 21.-Predictions
point to bluff hearing" of the three
public utilities bills before the munich
pal corporations committee In the As
sembly this afternoon. The lawmakers,
that is the Republican majority, have
received instructions to treat this inn
portant bit of threatened legislation
with as much frivolity as the serious
ness of their position will permit. and
the indications are that the hearing,
which is scheduled for 2:30 o'clock, will
be very shot farce, sort of cur
tain-raiser, for the same committee has
arranged for a hearing of the Moore
home-rule bill at o'clock. That
allows but thirty minutes for the con-
sideratlon of one of the most impor-
tant of legislative subjects. 1t would
require more time than that to simply
read the three bills.
Ther, are three so-called House util-
itics bills, respectively known as the
Scharf bill, the Pierce bill and the Sui
Ivan bill The latter is the old Martin
bill of last year. There is Senate
utilities bill introduced by Senator
Gebhardt, 1T that will not figure at
today's hearing. Indications are that
the Gebhardt blll will be smothered In
committee and that it will never again
appear upon the legislative surface.
Governor Forts reference to party
suicide" by failing to enact a utilities
law does not seem to affect the situa-
tion at ALL
Don't Expect Enactment.
Comparison of the utilities bill is
timely. Nobody looks for the enact
ment of any of them, not even their
authors. 1t is generally conceded that
the Martin measure of 1908 and 1902
introduced this year by Minority
Leader sullivan. OF Hudson, comes
nearer meeting the demand for strong
and comprehensive utilities legislation
than any OF it's companions. but it has
no more chance of enactment than any
of the others. The Martin or Sullivan
bill is House No. 36. The other meas
ures are the Scharff bill, House No. q
introduced by Assemblyman Joseph II.
Scharff, of Bergen, and said to have
been drafted by an owner of much cor
poration stock. The third is the Pierce
bill, which is replica of the Robbins
bill of 1908 and 1909, which was backed
by Governor Fort. The bill was intro
duced by Assemblyman Carlton B.
Pierce, of Union, following confer
ence with the governor at the early
stage of the present session. The Pierce
bill is stronger than the Scharff bill,
but far weaker than the Martin bill.
The Martin Sullivan bill is still in its
original form. 1t makes no concessions
of any kind. There is no halfway
business about the document. 1t pro-
vides for a commission empowering it
upon complaint, or of it's own motion,
to fix uniform, just and reasonable
rates, including an appropriation for
the valuation of all physical property
devoted to public services. There are
also provisions for the enforcement of
adequate service and to secure publicity
of the affairs of utilities companies,
regulation of the capital stock and Sc
curities of the same, and the imposi-
ton of penalties, in the form of fines,
for corporations violating the law and
Imprisonment for officials or other in
divduals who violate the provisions of
the measure. The bill was drawn in
conformity with the provisions of the
New York Public Service commission
which was based largely upon the in
terstate commerce act
Calls for Five Commissioners.
The Scharff bill provides for a COM
mission of five members and declares
they shall have general supervision and
control of utilities companies. Per-
sons who have studied the measure
claim these powers are so general In
form that they amount to a delegation
of authority of the Legislature without
specific instructions as to the manner
of executing these powers. In every
particular the jurisdiction under the
Scharff bill is general and would re-
suit in numerous interpretations should
any attempt be made to enforce 1t. The
Martin bill provides for new commits
sion of five members. The Pierce bill
makes the present State Railroad Com
mission the utilities commission. The
Governor is authorized to remove a
according to the Martin
bill, while the consent of the Senate is
also needed in the case of the Pierce
bill. The Martin bill provides for
special counsel, while the Pierce bill
says the attorney general shall be the
According to the Martin bill
the commission pr any person may
start an investigation as to rates, while
In the Pierce bill no rates can be in
vestigated except upon complaint of
fifty citizens.