Putnam patriot., 1910-12-02
Connecticut Editors Send Another Letter
TO President MeIien.
New Haven. Conn, Nov. -. 1910.
Mr.. Charles :. Nellen, Pres,
y " 4 81 q IL RaiIrnad n

i
New Haven. Conn, Nov. -, 1910.
/ Mr.. Charles :. MeIlen, Pres,
y. Y. y. II. x III. Railroad Co.,
New Haven, Conn.
| Dear sir
In the platforms on which they APP
pealed 10 the people of Connecticut in
the recent campaign, both political
| parties pledged themselves TO Iegisia-
lion for Public Utilities control. The
outcome Of that election leaves those
parties much more evenly balanced In
| legislative power than In recent years.
What we have been discussing as a
possibility seems now an impending
/ certainty. The incoming legislature
will pass some measure providing for
Public Utilities Commission. IL will
not take the shape, however, in our
opinion Of an enlargement of the SUI
perior court. such conception of your
"Court Of Commerce as we get from
the somewhat indefinite explanation
In your letter OF October 81 does not
meet, In our behalf, the requirements
Of Connecticut, nor the approval, SO
far as we observe, OF It's people. They
have in mind commission somewhat
on the plan OF those In other states.
We would respectfully suggest, there
fore, the wisdom Of returning to that
proposition In this discussion.
Moreover, your "t,ourt Of Com
merce" has more material faults. We
are addressing you, and not the legal
department Of your corporation, and
We believe that you rs a business man
appreciate, even If SOME Of your legal
advisers do not, that while lawyers are
sometimes most effective 10 befog is
sues, AMI 10 make the worse appear
the better reason, 1t takes business men
TO successfully conduct business affairs.
Should you expect, then, 10 secure
satisfactory results In the control of
business corporations from body
composed wholly Of lawyers? For We
do not concede. nor do those who most
clearly appreciate the need of Public
Utilities legislation concede. That as
you wrote in your letter Of Septem Der
q, ian administrative commission
which shall have broHd discretionary
powers 10 prescribe how those engaged
i'll the various kinds OF business which
most directly nd substantially affect
the general public shall bs obliged 10
serve the public, and what prices they
shall charge, Involves confusion ef
judicial and administrative functions,
altu i tutltiDft a1dtsithDle- 40 nbeu
body can possibly be worth its cost 10
the people unless IL be given ia some
degree combination Of this executive
and judicial power, subject naturally,
10 the final arbitration Of the courts.
In number Of ways your letter Of
October 81 differs In tone from your
previous communications The .Ia-
quiring Siatnese Statesman whom
you mention would probably be gfad-
noie of Yale College, aud would not be
content with your dietum regarding
the difference between court and a
commission. Inste ad, he would with
trained mind investigate conditions in
neighboring states, especially New
York, where he would find Public
Service COMMISSIONS commission,
please observe, not court, handling
these questions with marked ability
and satisfaction to both sides, and
made up of both business men and
men with legal training.
Yours sincerely,
Everett q. Hill. Pres.
Arthur ;. Barnes, See'y.
The Connecticut Editorial Association.