Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1910-01-07
President Sends Special Message
To Congress Recommending
Certain Amendments.
U. S. COURT OF COMMERCE
Should be Established to Have
Original Jurisdiction Over
Certain Cases.
Railroads Should Not be Permitted to
Own Stock in Other Roads, d.
rcctly or Indirectly.

Washington. Jan. 7.-President Taft q
special message dealing with amend
ments to the interstate commerce laws
looking to a more effective federal su
rervision of railroads and conveying his
recommendations for the passage of a
= federal incorporation act was trans
mit:ed to Congress today and read In
the house, the senate not being in ses
sion.
Ibe message followed closely the
forecasts that have been made from
time to time and in the suggested legls
latlon as TO railroads embodies all of
1he suggestions that the president has
made in his speeches on the subject.
Mr. Taft suggests no changes in the
Sherman antitrust law at this time
The antitrust feature of the mezsara
deals solely with the subject of federal
charters. The president thinks that an
opportunity should be given the big
industrial combinations to bring their
business once more into the Zone Of
iawfuiness' by taking OUT a federal
charter under certain prescribed oondj-
tlons before 1t becomes necessary to
proceed against every corporation about
"hich there is breath of suspicion.
TO THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.:
withheld from my annual message
discussion of needed 1es,s,a4,
uhuer the authority which Congress
bas to regulate commerce between the
states and with foreign countries and
salo that | would bring this subject
matter to Your. attention later in tb,s
session. Accordingly. beg to submit
10 you certain recommendations as.
TO the amendments to the interstate
commerce law and certain considera-
uons arising out of the operations of
the antitrust law. suggesting the wis
dom of federal incorporation of in
oustrial companies.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE. LAW
In the annual report of the inter-
state commerce commission of the year
1908, attention is called to the fact
that, between July 1, 1905, and the
CLOSE OF that year. 16 suits have been
begun TO set aside orders of the COM
mission (besides one commenced be-
lore that date) and that few orders
Oh much consequence had been permit
ted to go without protest; that the
questions presented by these various
suits were fundamental as the con-
stitutionality of the act itself was in
Issue, and the right of Congress to
delegate n q fril r,oI
establish an interstate rate was de-
nied, but that. perhaps. the most
serious practical question raised con-
cerned the extent of the right OF the
courts to review the orders of the
commission: and 1t was pointed out
that, II the contention OF the carriers
III this latter respect alone was sus-
talned, but little progress had been
made In the Hepburn act toward the
cnectiVe regulation OF interstate
transportation charges. In IL of the
cases referred to. IL was stated, pre-
limlnary lnjunctions were prayed for,
being granted in six and refused in
six
1T has from the first been well un-
derstood" says the commission. that
the success of the present act as
regulating measure depends largely
upon the facility with which tcmpor-
ary inJnnctionS could be obtained III
railroad company. by mere allega-
tion In its bill of complaint. supported
by eX-parte affidavits, can overturn
the result of days of patient investi-
CATION, no very satisfactory result can
be expected. The railroad loses nothing
by these proceedings, since, IL they
fail, II can only be required TO cstab-
lish the rate and to pay tho shippers
the difference between the higher rate
collected and the rate which Is finally
held TO be reasonable. In point of fact
1t usually profits. because IL can sell
dom he required to return more than
fraction OF the excess charges col
lected"
In its report of the year 1909. the
|nmisslon shows that, OF the z cases
referred to in its 1908 report only one
had been decided in the supreme court
OF the United States although f1Vc
other cases had been argued and sub
mitted to that tribunal In Oct. 1903.
CARRIERS RIGHT OF APPEAL.
or course every carrier affected by an
order OF the commission has con-
stitutional right to appeal to a federal
court to protect 1t from the enforce
ment of an order which it may show
to be prima facic confiscatory o. un-
Justly discriminatory i'll its effects. and.
as this application may be made TO a
court In any district of the United
States, not only does il delay result
great uncertainty is caused by con-
traricty of decision.
The question presented by these ap-
plications are too often technical In
their character and require hnowl-
edge OF the business and the mastery
OF great volume of conflicting evil
dencc which is tedious to examine and
troublesome to comprehend. II should
not be proper to attempt to deprive
any corporation OF the right to the re-
lasr x.N ..E s4Edn n N
decree, which, II undlsturbed. would
rob 1t OF reasonable return upon Its
investment or would subject II to
burdens which would unjustly discrim-
mate against 1t and In favor of other
carriers similarly situated. What Is.
however. OF supreme Importance Is that
the decision of such questions shall be
as speedy as the nature OF tho cir
cumstances Will admit. and that a
Uniformity of decision be secured so
as TO bring about an effective, system
attic and scientific enforcement OF the
common law. rather than conflicting