New-York tribune., 1910-01-08
Amendments to Interstate Commerce ,aw
Recommended in Message.
FEDERAL INCORPORATION URGED
Commerce Court and Supervision of Railroad Security Issues
acknowledgements Should Not Interfere
with Reasonable Combinations

Assistant Attorney General acting under
lhe ulrecuon or the Attorney General.
RATE AGREEMENTS.
The subject of agreements between carri-
ers with respect 10 rates has been often
discussed in Congress. Pooling arrange
ments 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 interstate international
trade or commerce would be unlawful.
The Republican platform of 1908 expressed
the belief that the interstate commerce Law
should be further amended so AS to give
the railroads the right to make and pub
lsh traffic agreements subject to the ap-
pToyal Of the commission. but maintaining
always the principle of competition be
tween naturally competing lines and avoid
ing the common control of such lines by
anv means whatsoever. In view of the
complete control over rate making and
other practices of interstate carriers estab-
commended in this communication, l see no
reason why agreements between carriers
subject TO the act. specifying the classlh-
cations of freight and the rates, fares and
charges for transportation Of passengers
and freight which they may agree to es-
tablish. should not be permitted, provided
copies of such agreements be promptly
filed with the commission. but subject 10 all
act and subject TO the right of any parties
TO such agreement to cancel IL as to all or
any Of the agreed rates, fares charges or
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 apptl-
cable to any proposed shipment Wlthou!, aS
a matter of fact, having any certain
means of actually ascertaining such rate.
1t has been suggested that 10 meet TINS
grievance carriers should be required, upon
application by a shipper, to quote the legal
rate in writing, and that the shipper should
be protected in acting upon the rate tnus
cd hrr+T Tna oh n
ton is that 1t would afford a much too
easy method of giving to favored shippers
unreasonable preferences and rebates.
think the law should provide that car
rier, upon written request by an intend
ing shipper. should quote in writing the
shipment under any schedules or tariffs
to which such carrier is a party. and that
II the party making such request shall suf-
fer damage In consequence of either re-
fusal or omission 10 quote the proper rate,
or in consequence of a misstatement of the
rate. the carrier shall be liable TO a penalty
in some reasonable amount-say, s250-to
accrue to the United States and to be
the appropriate District Attorney. Such
a penalty would compel the agent OF the
carrier TO exercise due diligence in quoting
the applicable legal rate, and would thus
afford the shipper real measure or pro-
lection, while not opening the way 10 col
lusion and the giving of rebates or other
unfair discrimination.
Under the existing law the commission
can only act with respect to an alleged ex-
cessiye rate or unduIy discriminatory
practice by carrier on a complaint made
BY some individual affected thereby. I
see no reason why the commission should
not be authorized to act on its own ini-
tiative well as upon the complaint Of
individual in investigating the fairness
of any existing rate or practice; and I
recommend the amendment of the law to
so provide; and also that the commission
shall be fully empowered, beyond any ~dues-
ton, TO pass upon the Classifications Of
commodities for purposes Of fixing rates,
in like manner as 1t may now do with re-
n i,n me- vi al TO-. Ia to
any transportation.
TO SUSPEND INCREASES
Under the existing law the commission
may not investigate an increase in rates
until II shall have become effective; and
although one or more carriers may file with
the commission a proposed increase in
rates or change in classi1cationS, or other
alteration Of the existing rates or classif-
cations, to become effective at the expira-
ton OF thirty days from such filing, no
proceeding can be taken 10 investigate the
reasonableness of such proposed change
until after II becomes operative. On the
other hand, if the commission shall make
order finding that an existing rate is
excessive and directing il to be reduced, the
carrier affected may by proceedings in the
courts stay the operation of such order OF
reduction for months and even years. 1t
has, therefore, been suggested that the
commission should be empowered, when
ever a proposed increase in rates is filed.
at once TO enter upon an investigation of
increase
make an order postponing the effective
date OF such increase until after such in
vesLgation shall be completed To this
much objection has been made the part
of carriers They contend that this would
be, in effect, to take from the owners of
the railroads the management of their
properties and to clothe the Interstate
Commerce Commission with the original
rate-making Power-a policy which
much discussed at the time Of the paSSa ge
of the Hepburn act in 1866, and which
was then and has always been distinctly
that they are able by resoTung to the
courts 10 stay the taking effect of the order
OF the commission until its reasonableness
shall have been Investigated by the courts
whereas the people deprived of any
such remedy with respect TO action by the
carriers, they point TO the provision of the
interstate commerce act providing for res
titution to the shippers by carriers of eX-
cessive rates charged in cases where the
order of the commission reducing such
rates is affirmed. II may be doubted how
effective this remedy really is Experience
pers do not resort to proceedings TO re-
cover the excessive rates which they may
have been required TO pay, for the simple
reason that they have added the rates paid
10 the cost Of the goods and thus enhanced
the price thereof TO their customers. and
that the public has III effect paid the bill
On the other hand, the enormous volume
of transportation charges, the great num-
, Der OF separate tariffs filed annually with
the Interstate Commerce Commission
amounting 10 almost 10000, and the Inn
possibility of any commission supervising
becoming effective on every transportation
line within the United States TO the extent
that would be necessary if their active con-
currence We're required in the making Of
every tariff, has satisfied that this
power, if granted, should be conferred in a
very limited and restricted form. | there
fore recommend that the Interstate Com
I merre Commission be empowered whenever
any proposed increase OF rates is filed, at
once either complaint or of its own
notion to enter upon an investigation into
4. the reasonablenesS OF such change and
that il be further empowered. in its dis
cretiOn, To postpone the effective date OF
such proposed increase for period not ex-
ceeding sixty days beyond the date when
such rate would take effect. If within this
time ii shall determine that such increase
is unreasonable, IL may then by it's order
either forbid the increase at all or fix the
maximum beyond which II shall not be
made If, on the other hand, at the eXpira-
tiOn OF this time the commission shall not
have completed its investigation, then the
rate shall take effect precisely il would
under the existing law. and the commission
may continue it's investigation with such
results as might be realized under the law
as il now stands.
ROUTING OF FREIGHT.
The claim is very earnestly advanced by
some large associations of shippers that
shippers of freight should be empowered
70 direct the route over which their ship
I ments should pass To destination, and in
this connection IL has been urged that the
provisions of Section Is of the Interstate
commerce act which now empowers the
/ commission. after hearing on complaint