The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-01-07


| the antitrust law
stocks must be issued at par value
for money paid or for property or SER
vices rates at full value under an in
o,,irv Nv the federal authority, who
shall supervise all stock and bond is.
| sues.
The Message in Full.
To the Senate and House of Repre-
| sentatives:
I withheld from my annual message
| a discussion of needed legislation un-
der the authority which congress has
! to regulate commerce between the
states and with foreign countries and
| said that 1 would bring this subject
matter TO your attention later in he
session. Accordingly / beg to submit
to you certain recommendations as TO
| the amendments to the interstate COM
merce law and certain considerations
arising out of the operations of the
antitrust law suggesting the wisdom
of federal incorporation of industrial
companies.
Interstate Commerce Law.
In the annual report of the interstate
commerce commission CT the year 1908
attention is called 70 the fact that be-
tween July 1 1908, and lie close OF that
year 16 suits had been begun to set
aside orders of the commission (besidcs
one commenced before that date), and
that few orders of much consequence
test; that the questions presented by
these various suits were f1adame entail,
as the constitutionality of the act itself
was in issue. and the right of congress
to delegate to any tribunal authority to
establish an interstate rate was denied;
but that perhaps the most serious prac-
| tical question raised concerned the ex-
tent of the right of the courts to review
the orders of the commission; and it
was pointed out that if the contention
of the carriers in this latter respect
alone were sustained, but little progress
had been made in the Hepburn act to-
ward the effective regulation of inter
state transportation charges. In view
of the cases referred to- it was stated,
preliminary injunctions were prayed
for being granted in six and refused
| in six.
'.It has from the first been well
understood" SagS the commission,
that the success of the present act
as regulating measure depended
largely upon the facility with which
temporary injunctions could be OBJ
! tanned. If railroad company, by
mere allegation in it's bill of com
plant, supported by eX parte affida-
Wits, can overturn the result of days
of patient investigation. no very sat
isfactory result can be expected The
railroad loses nothing by these pro-
ceedings, since if they fail it can only
| be required to establish the rate and
| to pay to shippers the difference be-
tween the higher rate collected and
the rate which is finally held to be
reasonable. In point of fact it usual
| ly profits, because it can seldom be
required to return more than a frac-
ton of the excess charges collected
Only One Decided.
| In its report for the year 1909 the
commission shows that of the seven
teen cases referred to in it's 1903 re-
! mort only had i,,-% he
! supreme court of the United States,
although five other cases had been
( argued and submitted to that tribunal
in October, 1909
or course, every carrier affected by
an order of the commission has a con-
-stftutional right to appeal to a fed
eral court to protect it from the en-
forcement of an order which it may
| show to be prima facie conf1scatory or
\ unJuStly discriminatory in its effects
and as this application may be made
Ito court in any district of the United
states, not, only does delay result in
the enforcement of the order, but
great uncertainty is caused by con-
| trariety of decision.
/ The questions presented by these ap-
| plications are too often technical in
their character and require a knowl-
edge of the business and the mastery
| of great volume of conflicting evil
dence which is tedious to examine and
not be proper to attempt to deprive
any corporation of the right to the re-
| view by "a court of any order or de-
tcree which, if undisturbed, would rob
II OF reasonable return upon its in
Vestment or would subject it to bur-
dens which would unjustIy discrimin-
ate against It and in favor of other
carriers similarly situated. What is
however, of supreme Importance, is
that the decision of such questions
n1xy
the circumstances will admit and
that a uniformity. of decision be Sc
cured SO as to bring about an eff
fective, systematic and scientific en-
1orcement Of the commerce law
rather than conflicting decisions and
uncertainty of final result
Court of Commerce.
For this purpose 1 recommend the
establishment of court of the United
states composed of five judges desig-
mated for such purpose from among
the circuit judges of the United States
to be known as the United States
; Court of Commerce." which colfrt
shall be clothed with exclusive origi
nal jurisdiction over the folIoWins
classes of cases:
% All cases for the enforcement
otherWlse than by adjudication and col
!ectlon OF forfeiture or penalty, or by
lnIllctlon OF. criminal punishment, of az
! oruer OF the Interstate commerce com
mission other for the payment of mon.
ey.
70 All cases brought to enjoin. Sc
, ASIDE annul or suspend any order o.
! requirements of the Interstate com
merce commission.
go All such cases as under section
OF the act of Feb. 10. 1903, known a.
the Elkins act' are authorized to b,
: maintained in a circuit court of tb,
: United States
0) All such mandamus proceeding
5 as under the provisions of section 20
, or section % of the interstate commerc
e law are authorized to be maintained il
? a circuit court of the United States
4 reason specially analogous to thos
winch induced the congress to Great
( the court of customs appeals by tn