The Vinita daily chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1902-1913, 1910-05-23

railroad Irelght rates ordinarily -
complicated question. involving intri
cate matters OF law; but it becomes
even a more serious problem wheE
two regulating authorities clash OF
a proposition Of the reasonableness O
rates. Thoughtful observers Of
freight rate regulation have anticipat
ed that. sooner or later. conflict o.
authority would arise between the
interstate commerce commission and
one or more Of the state railroad com
missions concerning the fixing OF
rates.
Precisely such conflict has devel-
oped over a comparatively insignif-
cant case that recently was brought
before the interstate commerce com
mission. It was that OF E. E. Saun-
ders & Company. Of Pensacola, Fla,
against the Southern Express Com
pany The complainants are fish
dealers and shippers at Pensacola. In
the ordinary course of their business,
they operate largely in the state of
Alabama, shipping fish in quantities
from Pensacola to points of destina-
ton in that state by express.
Recently, the railroad commission
of Alabama fixed an express rate on
fish from Mobile, Ala, to other intra-
state points that was far below the
express rate from Pensacola to the
same points of destination. This rate
the express company was forced to
put in effect, although it protested
against it. Mobile fish shippers, by
reason of this rate. were given an
advantage over the fish shippers of
Pensacola to points within Alabama.
Although. in many instances. the dis
tance from Pensacola to points Of des-
fination was less than from Mobile
The Southern Express company re-
fused to make the same rates from
to points in Alabama as it
was required to make from Mobile. its
refusal resulting in complaint filed
against it with the interstate COM
merce commission.
The commissions opinion in the
case was handed down today. It was
by Commissioner Harlan and
is the unanimous judgment Of the
It indicates clearly the
lines OF conflict between the national
commission and the various state com
missions, in the regulation Of freight
and express rates; and. in that sense,
is one of the most important decisions
rendered by the commission for many
months While the case directly in
volved may be considered as incon- |
sequential. comparatively, the princi- |
pie enunciated by the commission is
of countrywide application, as it
opens, at once. the question whether
the national. or the state, regulating
is to be paramount in the
fixing of freight rates.
The commission states its position
In these terms:
Upon general principles of comfy |
the action of state commission in fix
ing rates on state traffic must be treat
ed with all due respect. but this com
mission has never felt itself bound to
accept state-made rate as a neces-
sary measure of an interstate rate.
criticising the state commits
sion rates from Mobile, this commits
sion, in the light Of the record and its
1wn Investigations. finds itself unable
o accept the Alabama rates as fair
md reasonable basis for fixing the de
rates to the same points
rom Pensacola"
The situation and the testimony are
discussed thoroughly in the opinion.
n announcing that 1t would not close
he record in the case until the de-
endant had made further efforts to
contest the order Of the Alabama
the interstate commerce
commission says
The carriage Of traffic by com
non carrier for one community or one
yet of shippers at less than it carries
he same traffic for a like distance,
md under substantially similar trans
1ortation conditions. for another com
nunity or another set of shippers is
not only in eontrayention of funda-
mental right and justice but is os-
sentially iniquitous. II such a dis
is practiced by a common
carrier as between communities or
sets of shippers. within the
same state and on traffic moving only
within the state, redress, may usually
be had under the state laws. On the
other hand, If an interstate carrier is
guilty Of such discrimination with
respect to interstate trafic, redress