Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-01-07


of excessive rates charged in cases
where the order of the commission re-
ducing such rates are affirmed.
Public Pays Cost.
1t may be doubted how effective this
remedy really is. Experience has shown
that many, perhaps most, shippers do
not resort to proceedings to recover the
excessive rates which they may have
been required to pay, for the simple
reason that they have added the rates
paid to the cost of the goods and thus
enhanced the price thereof to their GUS
toners, and that the public ha in eff
| fect paid the bill. On the other, hand,
the enormous volume of transportation
| charges, the great number of separate
tariffs filed annually with the Inter-
state Commerce Commission, amount
ing to almost 200, 900, and the impossi-
bility of any commission supervising
the making of tariffs in advance of
their becoming effective on every trans
portation line. within the United States
to the extent that would be necessary II
their active concurrence were required
in the making of every tariff, has salts
| lieu his lnds tHio POWCis IL 5hoieNNf
should be conferred in a very limited
n restricted form.
i therefore recommend TINT the
Interstate Commerce Commission
be empowered whenever any pro.
posed Increase of rates In hIed, MT
once, either ON complaint of or its
own notion TO enter upon IN In
vestisntion into the reasonable
ness of such change, and that 1t be
further empowered, in its discre-
ton, to postpone the effective date
of such proposed increase for a
period not exceeding sixty days
beyond the date when such rate
would take effect. IL within this
time 1t shall determine that such
increase Is unreasonable, 1t may
then, by its ORDER, either forbid tho
increase ut all or fix the maximum
beyond which 1T shall not be made.
II, on the other hand, at the ex-
piration of this tiIpe, the commits
sion shall not have completed it's
investigation, then the rate shall
take effect precisely as 1t would
under the existing law, and the
commission mny continue its in
y~cstigatfOn with such results as
might be realized under feh law as
1t now stands.
The claim is very earnestly advanced
by some large associations of shippers
that shippers of freight should be en-
powered to direct the route over which
their shipments should pass to destina.
ton, and in this connection 1T has beer
urged hat the provisions of section II
of the Interstate act, which
now empowers the commission. after
hearing on complaint, to establish
through routes and maximum joint
rates to- be charged, etc, when no rea.
sonable or satisfactory through route
shall have been aIreAdy established, be
amended so as to empower the commits
sion to take such action. even when one
existing reasonable and s~atisfactor,
route already exists, if it be possible t
establish additional routes. This Seems
to me TO be a reasonable provision.
know of no reason why a shipper should
NOT have the right to elect between two
or more established through outes t.
which the initial carrier may be &
party. and to require his shipment to BIZ
transported to destination over such o.
1 1hNih pASN go ~ it'I 4N1AfitRtO wi
that purpose, subject, however, in TIL,
exercise OF this right to such %reasonabl,
regulations as the Interstate Commerce
Commission may prescribe.
Control of stock.
The Republican platform of 1908 de
clared in favor of amending the inter.
state IN law, but so as always
to maintain the principle of competi
ton between naturally competing lines
and avoiding the commo control o
such lines by any means whatsoever
One of the most potent means of exer
cising such control has been through
the holding of stock of one railroad
company by another company owning
a competing line. This condition ha
grown up under express Legislative
power conferred by the laws of man,
States, and to attempt now to susdenl.
reverse that policy so far as 1t affect
the ownership of stocks heretofore 81
acquired, would be to inf1ict q srievou
injury, not only upon he corporation
affected, but upon a large body of thu
-holding public. L
J, however. recommend that the
law shall he amended so ar TO pro-
vide that from and after the dnte
of it's passage no railroad company
subject to the interstate
act shall, directly or Indirectly, nc
quire any interests of any kind In
capital stock, or purchase or lease
any railroad of any other corpora-
tion which completes with IL re-
speeding business to which the In
terstafc commerce act applies.
But especially for the protection of TIL
|, minority stockholders i'll securing L
them the best market for their stool
I recommend that such prohibition b
coupled with a proviso that it shall no
|, operate to prevent any ~corporatici
J witch. at the date of the ~passaRapp