Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-05-10

ments have been introduced by which
shippers who have an interest nay be
heard by special ounse If they desire,
under regulations of the court.
Another section requires companies
by their agents to furnish a statement
in writing of the rate or charge ap-
plicable to a described shipment be-
tween stated places under schedules or
tariffs to which the company Is a party
or a penalty for failure.
1.-THE other provision authorized the
commission not only to review rates,
but the cl~assifications of freight, and
enable the commission of its own mo-
ton to investigate the question whether
any rate is unjust or unreasonable, or
,unjustly discriminatory, or unduly
preferential. or prejudicial or otherwise
in violation of any provisions of the
act.
1.-Two sections have been stricken out.
Section z attempted to legalize the
making of traffic agreements not to
last longer than thirty days between
competing lines, but forbade pooling.
This was declared for in the platform
and recommended to Congress in two
or three messages of President Roose-
welt. The purpose was to legalize the
practise la will prevail whether the
law permits it or not.
1T seems to me essential that rates
should be fixed temporarily at the same
amount in order to prevent a rate cut
ting each time the fixing of rates is
had. No one suggests the wisdom of
instituting prosecutions under the anti
trust law to prevent this practise, and it
seemed wise therefore to formulate its
I,-..A 4s~-- 49, a. - I-x,r.
but the fear that it might impair the
efficiency of the antitrust law in some
indefinite way was so strong among
some members of the Senate hat it was
thought wise to withdraw the section.
Wants Section Restored.
Section IL was also withdrawn. That
Is the section that forbids the acquisi-
tion by one railroad company of the
stocks In a competing line, but where
such an acquisition has already been
made of 80 per cent. authorizes the
acquiring company to increase it's
holding to 100 per cent. This was not
with the view of the strengthening the
control of the acquiring company, for
30 per cent. was all that it needed, but
1t was to keep open a market to the
minority stockholders to sell to the
majority stockholders. This, too, it
was thought. in some way infringed
on the antitrust law. and the whole
section was dropped. I am hopeful the
section may be restored to the extent
of forbidding future acquisition by one
line of stock in a competing line.
ut is true that an act affecting inter
state commerce might be part of a con-
spiracy to restrain competition and so
restrain trade, and be punishable under
the ANTITRUST law, but it would greatly
facilitate prosecution IL the specific act
of the acquisition of stock In a com
peting line could be denounced and
punished or prevented by injunction.
II think 1t will be seer from this re-
view that the railroad bill. which In
many respects is the most important Of
the administration measures, still re-
tains its important features, and l am
hopeful hat within the next two weeks
we shall see the passage of h bill In
both Houses. the adjustment of the
differences between the two Houses and
its final enactment.
1T means a great step forward in the
regulation entrusted to the Interstate
Commerce Commission. subject to a
court review. 1t does not transfer-and
I should be loath to do %this-from the
board of directors to the Interstate
Commerce Commission the power of
running and operating the railroad. 1t
still leaves wide discretion in the own
ers of the property. but the powers x
ercised by the commission, I feel conf
dent, can be exercised for good and
will not remove the existing motives of
enlightened selfishness for the improve
ment by the owners of railroads in the