Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1910-01-08

rate thus quoted; but the objection 10
this suggcStion is that it would afford
much ttSS easy method of giving TO
favored shippers unreasonable preft r.
enccs and rebates. / think that the
law shoul1 provide that carrier up
on written request by an intending
shipper, should quote i'll writing the
rate or charg" applicable to the pro-
posed Shipm"nt under any schedules or
tariffs to which suvh carrier is a par
ty. and that if the party making su.'h
request shall suffer damage in cnnyc-
uuence OF either refusal or omission TO
quote the proper rate or in con="-
quence of a miS-Statemcnt of the rate
the carrier shall be liable to d penalty
in some reasonable amount say, two
hundred and fifty dollars. to accrue to
the United states and to be recovered
in a civil action brought by the ap
propriatc 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 Il real
measure OF protection. while not open
ing the way to conclusion and the Civ
ing of rebates "r other unfair discrim-
ination.
Under the existing law the commits
sion can only act with respect to an
alleged excessive rate or undulV dis
crimirator> Practice by carrier on a
complaint made by some individual AFT
rccted thereby. | see no reason Why
the commission should not he author
lied to act on its own initiative as we'll
as upon the complaint of an individual
in Investigating the fairness Of any
existing rate or practice: and recon-
mend the amendment of the law to 50
provide: and also that the commission
shall ne fully empowered. beyond any
question to pass upon the classltica-
| tionH of commodities for purposes of
| fixing rates. in like manner as il mag
! now do with respect to the maximum
| rate applicable to any transportation.
| Under tie existing law the commission
may not investigate an increase in rates
| until after it shall have become effective;
and although one or more carriers may
| file with the commission a proposed in
crease in rates or change in classifica-
tons. to Income effective at the eXpira-
ton of thirty days from such filing, no
proceeding can he taken to Investigate the
| observation-disclosures oi SuCu IlbppStu Cll'iI'oF
I until after it becomes operative
| On the other hand, if the commission
shall make an order finding that an eN-
| listing rate is excessive and directing 1t to
be reduced, the carrier affected may by
proceedings in the courts stay the opera
! ton of such order of reduction for
months and even years 1t has. there
| fore. been suggested that the commission
should he empowered, whenever pro-
| posed increase in rates is filed at once to
enter upon an investigation of the rea-
sonableness of the increase and to MAKE
| an order postponing the effective date of
| such increase until after such inVestiSa-
| tioh shall be completed To this much OBJ
| lection has been made on the part of the
| carriers. They contend that this would
be. in effect. to take from the owners of
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 pas
sage of the Hepburn act in 1905-06. and
tinctlv rejected: and in reply to the suS-
/ yestion that they are able by resorting
| to the courts to stay the taking effect OF
| the order of the commission until its rea-
! sonablen shall have been investigated
i by the courts. whereas the people are de-
prived of any such remedy with respect
to action by the carriers, they point to