Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1910-01-13

the order and identified by reference
thereto. that such irreparable damage
would result to the petitioner, specify.
Ing the nature of the damage.
Under the existing law the inter.
state commerce commission itself In.
itiates and defends litigation in the
courts for the enforcement or I'm the
defense Of Its orders and DEGREES.
In my opinion. all litigation affecting
the government should be under the
direct control OF the department Of
justice.
Agreement on Rates.
The subject Of agreements between
carriers with respect to ties has been
often discussed IN congress. Pooling
arrangements and agreements were
condemned by the general sentiment
OF the people, and under the Sherman
antitrust law any agreement between
carriers operating IN restraint of inter.
state or international trade or com.
merce would be unlawful. I see no
reason why agreements between car.
riers subject to the act specifying the
Considerations Of freight and the rates,
fares and charges for transportation of
passengers and freight which they may
agree to establish should not be per-
mittcd. provided copies Of such agree
ments be promptly filed with the com.
mission, but subject TO all the pro-
visions Of the interstate commerce act
and subject to the right Of any parties
TO such agreement to cancel 1t as to
all or any Of the agreed rates, fares,
charges or classilications by thirty
days notice in writing to the other
parties and to the commission.
Much complaint is made by shippers
over the state Of the law under which
they are held bound to know the legal
rate applicable to any proposed ship
ment without, as a matter Of fact
having any certain means Of actually
ascertaining such rate. think that
the law should prov ide that carrier
upon written request by an intending
shipper, should quote in writing the
rate or charge applicable to the pro-
posed shipment under any schedules
or tariffs to which such carrier ia n
party and that II the party making
such request shall suffer damage In
consequence Of either refusal or Omis-
sion to quote the proper rate or in con-
sequence of MEASUREMENT Of the rate
the carrier shall be liable to a penalty
in some reasonable amount. say $3.50,
to accrue to the United States and to
be recovered In q civil action brought
by the appropriate district attorney
Under the existing law the commits
sion can act only with respect to an
alleged excessive rate or unduly dis
criminatory practice by a carrier on a
complaint made by some individual
affected thereby. | see no reason why
the commission should not be author
lied to act on It's own initiative as
we'll as upon the complaint Of an
individual and also that the com
mission shall be fully empowered be-
yond amy question to pass upon the
Of commodities for pur-
poses Of fixing rites, In like manner
as it may now do with respect to the
maximum rate applicable to any trans
portation.
Public Pays Increased Rates.
Under the existing law the commits.
sion may not investigate an increase
in rates until after it shall have be-
come effective. On the other hand. il
the commission shall make an order
finding that an existing rate is excess
i've and directing 1t to be reduced the
carrier affected may by proceedings In
the courts stay the operation of such
order of reduction for months and
ever years. 1t has therefore been sug-
gested that the commission should
he empowered, whenever a proposed
increase in rates is filed, at once to en-.
Ter upon an investigation of the rea.
sonabeness of the increase and TO
make an order postponing the effective
date of such increase until after sucb
shall be completed.
10 this much objection has been
made on the part of carriers. They
that this would be, in effect
to take from the owners of the rail.
roads the management of their prop.
critics and to clothe the interstate com.
merce commission with the original rate
making power, policy which was
much discussed at the time of the mas.
sage of the Hepburn act in 1866 and
which was then and has always been
distinctly rejected.
They point to the provision of the in.
terstAte commerce act providing for
to the shippers by carriers
OF excessive rates charged in cases
where the order OF the commission re-
1ucng such rates are affirmed. It
may be doubted how effective this
remedy really Is. Experience has
shown that many, perhaps most. ship
pers do not resort to proceedings to
recover the excessive rates which they
may have been required to pay. for
he simple reason that they have add |
ed the rates paid to the cost of the
goods and thus enhanced the price
thereof to their customers and that
The public has in effect paid the bill.
impossible to Supervise TARIFF.
On the other hand. the enormous vol.
lme of transportation charges, tile
great number OF separate tariffs filed
annually with the interstate commerce
amounting to almost 200.
300. and the impossihllity Of any com.
mission supervising the making OF
tariffs In advance Of their becoming /
on every transportation line
within the United States to the extent
that would be necessary il their &C.
tive concurrence were required in the