El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1910-05-23
INTERSTATE AND STATE TRAFFIC
COMMISSIONS HAVE CLASH

! mon carrier for one community or one
set of shippers at less than il carries
the same traffic for like 1iSEar':e,
and under substantially similar tranS~
portation conditions, for another COM
munity or another set of shippers IS
not only in contraveltion of funoa-
mental right and justice. but is essen
TALLY Ubiquitous. If such discrimina-
ton is practiced by a common carrier
as between communities or different
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 inter
state traffic, redress may be had under
the act to regulate commerce.
Question of Existance of Law.
But when a carrier, as in this case,
serves two communities similarly sit
uated, by hauling the same traffic under
similar conditions from a point of or
igin to destinations in the same state
and also to the same destinations from
an interstate point of origin, 1t is not
altogether clear that existing legiSla-
ti0E affords redress against q us rim
ination, as between the two points,
when resulting from an order by me
4
such power is lodged somewhere under
appropriate legislation, it is evident that
state made rates, if established in pur-
suance Of a narrow or selfish local poll
icy, may not only hinder and harm
and burden Interstate traffic and inter-
state interests, but may, if adjusted
with that end in view, take from point
| in another state a business that nat
urally belongs to that point or In which
2 t. FaI
! the basis of equal rates and equal op-
portunity.
Injury to Pensacola.
Whatever may be tho explanation,
whether it rests in the greater ZEAL
activity, and ability Of the fishing~in-
/ terests at Pensacola or whether it is n
natural advantage belonging to that
! port, the fact appears that for years
| Pensacola has enjoyed a larger business
| in the distribution of fish throughout
| the state of Alabama than has Mobile.
/ By readjustment of the state rates out
! of Mobile, whether so intended or not,
the process of taking from Pensacola,
| through lower state made Transports
ton charges, what its superior zeal or
: its greater natural advantages have
given to it has commenced and is now
! going on.
''On principle it is clear that a cor
rler operating through two or more
! states is but one vehicle of commerce,
| and all traffic moved by it, whether
state or interstate, ought, when the gen.
| eral transportation conditions are the
| same, to bear its just proportion of the
cost Of operation and ought to yield no
| more and no less than its just propoc-
| ton of the revenues of the carriers.
Unreasonable Theory.
Amy other theory is fundamen ally
J inequitable illogical, and unreasona 0ie.
| 1t may be, but on that point We express
J no opinion, that the congress may con-
stitutionally protect interstate COM
| merce, as well as the carriers that are
| engaged in interstate transportation, by
requiring that any state traffic moved
/ by such carrier shall bear its just
( proportion of the cost of operation and
! yield its proper proportion of profit TO
/ the carrier; and that with such end
! In view it may authorize this commits
| sion to fix minimum rates, at least, FOR
/ state traffic when moved by carriers
! engaged also in interstate transporta-
! ton; or that it may provide that no car
! rier engaged in the interstate transpcr-
/ tatlon of passengers or property may at
/ the same time carry state traffic at
rates that are less than the rates eX-
| acted by it for interstate carriage of
/ like distance and under like transporta-
ton conditions. 1t has, however, not
attempted any such legislation, and
| whether such an enactment would stand
! the test of scrutiny by the courts under
4! the constitution as 1T now stands and
! If so, whether it would be desirable
from the standpoint of broad public
! policy, are questions that must ulti-
mately be determined by the Legislative
power and therefore can not profitably
be discussed by the commission in this
| proceeding"