Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1910-01-07
TO TAKE INITIATIVE,

,,,oa sure of protection ,vhjla 80 = 60
the way to collusion and tbn Speiiiie
rebates or other unfair discrimIna lion
IO LANE INITIATIVE.
Under tho existing law ,ho o,
eion ran act only win ras,'oot to,'liiiiS' i
alleged excessive rate ar ,,nd,,, ~ an
crimjnatorv practise hv = y oan.;y us
complaint made by some ,nd,,,,S,,ot pil
fected thereby sec no rnaso,, Ia. al
the commission should not be author
tsative nc voI y. M
eon,nIa;nt of on indt,,SS upon tne
eating the fairness Of a ,' t iiifesu-
rate or practise. and raoo,,,,,,Ss ~ ~
amendment of the law to 90 oro,,;3e' s,,o
and also that the commission shau he
fully empowered bevond any cr,astir,.
TO pass upon the classifcations Of con-
modities for purposes OF fixing rates IN
like manner as 1t may now do with
respect to the maximum rate applica-
BILE to any transportation.
Under the existing Law the commits
sion may not investigate an Increase In
rates until atter II shall have become
enectiVe' ana although one or more
curriers' may me win the commission
HpIopoSeu cilahee IN rates or change in
ctassliiraSloiis, l,".S OF other alterations of
,,,S. sne .ose..is VI ciaSsihcations, to
5a,rs f,er, ~ "a a,;,n 1.'e eApiratlon OF 80
oas ha tai,ors - ,,IntSs, .',nS, no proceeding
sI,ianass &c c,,ot ,lvo.'e.e s.'e the reason
oS,or a. hfdo,,ee 1922 cnatise until
S,Sd 10 tt,o a,,,.Ietss, on inc other
order dndjnp that an a,,dst;, 9t,a nnahe an an
cxoessIye and directino, ~ 10 ha7,..s.. n.e 10
Ihc carrier affected MAJ h1r rooI'
jncs in the courts stay, tbo oI,aIa,;e., "
such order of reduction for monthS al
even years.
,,or,,,o,,,
MIMI 'oW ELY NEEDED
II has, therefore. been suggested that
the commission should be empowered
whenever proposed increase in rates
as filed, at once to enter upon an inves-
tlgation of the reasonableness of the
increase and to make an order post
ponins the effective date OF such in
crease until after such investigation
Shall be completed. TO this much OBJ
5ection has been made on the part of
carriers. They contend that this would
be, In effect, to take from 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
was much discussed at the time of the
passage of the Hepburn act In 1866.
which was then. and has been, distinct.
ly rejected. and in reply to the sugges-
tioR that they are able, by resorting to
the courts, to, stay the taking effect of
the order of the commission until its
reasonableness shall have been investi-
gated by the courts whereas the people
are deprived of any such remedy with
respect to action by the carriers they
po.'is - .'S pioNision ''' vi tne inter
10 the shippers by carriers OF excessive
rates charged In cases where the or
ders of the commission reducing such
rates are affirmed. 1t may be doubted
how effective this remedy is.
Experience has shown that many,
perhaps most shippers do not resort TO
proceedings to recover the excessive
rates which they may have been re-
quired to pay for the simple reason
that they have added the rates paid to
the cost Of the goods and thus en-
HANGED the price thereof TO their Gus
toners, and that the public. in effect,
has paid the bill.
On tho other hand the enormous vol
ume of transportation charges. the
great number OF separate tariffs filed
annually with the Interstate commerce
commission, amounting To almost 2OO.-
700. and the imposslbility of any com
mission supervising the making OF
tariffs in advance of their becoming ef-
fectiye on every TRANSFORMATION line
within the United States to the extent
tnat would be necessary II their active
king of every tariff has satisfied me
that this power, II granted, should be
conferred In q very limited and re-
stricted form.
n,co,,,r,>r,, ,c
CONCENTRATIONS.
| therefore recommend that the in
terstatc commerce commission III, en-
powered wheneyer any nronosed in
crease OF rates Is filed nj once. either
on complaint or of its own motion. to
enter upon an Investigation into the
rcasonableness of such change and that
II be further empowered In its discretion
To postnone tho effective date of such
proposed Increase for a nerlod not ex
ccedlnp 60 days beyond the date when
such rate wouId take effect If within
thIs time II shall detar,nIne that s,,ch
Increase is unreasonable n NAV then
hy us order either forbid the Increas 60
AT all or Ak the maximum bevond
which II shall not he made n on tba
other hand at the exns-ation of this
time the commission shall not have
connleted its Investigation then the
rate shall taka effect nracisalv 40 II
shouId ,,nder the eYlstine law and the
commIssIon NAV continue ito ,nvostic-a- :
tion With encb results as would he rcal-
3zed under The law as \ now stands
RIGHT TO ROUTE.
MI ,,t,. l. .,... .o,-.,,a.,,, . od,.,rooa
S.'',n. ,,Io - a,se 49,, - at,turors
~ aoiI ,a Ssoisl. .so,,,5 W on
tiEie 9uippeis VI liSi6Hb SiiOuAu DS IN