The Hattiesburg news. (Hattiesburg, Miss.) 1908-1917, 1910-05-25
IMP0RTAH DECISION BY
Conn., COMMISSION.
lBu Associated Press.l

Washington, May 25.-Regulation of
railroad freight rates ordinarily is
complicated question, involving in
tricate matters of law; but it becomes
even more serious problem when
two regulating authorities clash on
proposition of the reasonableness of
rates. Thoughtful observers of freight
rate regulation have anticipated that,
sooner or later, a conflict of authority
would arise between the Interstate
Commerce Commission and one or
more of the State Railroad Commits
sions concerning the fixing of rates.
Precisely such a conflict has devel-
oped over a comparatively insignifi-
cant case that recently was brought
before the Interstate Commerce Com
mission. 1t was that of E. E. Saun-
ders & Co., of Pensacola, Fla, against
the Southern Express Company. The
complainants are fish dealers ana
shippers at Pensacola. In the ordi'
nary course of their business, they
operate largely in the state Of Ala.
bama, shipping fish in quantities from
Pensacola to points of destination in
that state by express.
Recently, the Railroad Commission
Of Alabama fixed an express rate on
fab from Mobile, Ala, to other intra-
state points that was far below the
express rate from Pensacola to the
same points of destination. This rate
the express company was forced to
put in effect, although it protested
against It, Mobile fsh shippers, by
reason of this rate, were given an adj
vantage over the fish shippers of Pen.
sacola to points within Alabama. AL
though, in many instances, the dis
lance from Pensacola to points of
destination was less than from Mo
bile.
The Southern Express Company re-
fused to make the same rates from
Pensacola to points in Alabama as it
was required to make from Mobile, its
refusal resulting in a complaint filed
against it with the Interstate Com.
merce Commission.
The Commissions opinion in the
case was handed down yesterday. 1t
was prepared by Commissioner Har-
Ian and is the unanimous judgment
of the Commission. 1t indicates
clearly the lines of conflict between
the National Commission and the va
rious State Commissions, in the reg
ulation of freight and express rates
, and, in that sense is one of the most
important decisions rendered by the
Commission for many months. While
the case directly involved may be
considered as inconsequential, com
paratively, the principle enunciated
by the Commission is of countrywide
application, as it opens, at once, the
question whether the national, or the
state, regulating authority is to be
paramount in the fixing of freight
rates.
The Commission states its position
in these terms:
upon general principles of com
ity the action of state commission
in fixing rates on state traffic mus
be treated with all due respect, but
this Commission has never felt itsel
bound to accept statewide rate as
a necessary measure Of an interstate
rate. Without criticising the STATE
commission rates from Mobile, thi!
Commission. in the light of the RECORD
and its own investigations, finds itsel
unable to accept the Alabama rate
as fair and reasonable basis for fix
ing the defendants rates to the sam'
points from Pensacola"
The situation and the testimony ar
discussed thoroughly in the opinion
In announcing that it would not clos