The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1911-11-10

,. ,,
clNes involved the so-calIed long ana snort
haui controversy. Under present cond-
tiOns a commodity rate from Missouri
Rivar 10 Sno,a,, for irst,,co j. tbo ,,tc
e., - ,,t =, p:....- -. Al p..a
i'oi'. ''''' VA ~ ,''' 80
COAST pIus ba'k maui IRON the racine
coast 10 81 okanc The Interstate Com
morco Commission in the Spokanr case
liyiJ,l 49,, i-,,,,,J SET, ,,,,, g., ,,,ri-
W -
toT'a' zones III "TueIed ihdt LOT places
west oi the Missouri River no higher
charge should bc made for any inter-
mediate pI,ro than H. a mora dist,p,
-, s,.i,.t,,.t.;. ~,
f'~'' w ''''S'' W 'N'''''''"" - ''' ''
ClSo ana l''ht9 on a lIU" WIN " tu' '"ih-
mission allowed a per cent. advance TO
intermediate points over the rates charged
from the same place of origin 10 Pacific
coast terminals For freight originating
I'm the Bulalo-PItt.burg zone the com
mission allowed A 10 per cent incrcl.n for
Intermediate uoiuts and for freight orlgi-
nlting In the Atlantic solboard 2onc a
25 Ger cent increase over the long haul
rates
The lawyers rcnrcscntinc thr Intcr.
state Commerce Commission and the
Government have Contendpd that the
rates inpos.d bv the Interstate Commerce
Commission were not conhsCatorv mas
much as they we're fixed merely al a
percentage Dt the rate CHARGED 10 the
Pacific coast. There was no prohibition
in the cornission's order against tho
railroads increasing tLn,r long haul
rates To IN, Pacific coast and thus making
proportiouate hCreases in the rates To-
tnterm.diate n,ints m. ronn,ission
would still. however. retain the right To
pass upon the rsasonablGuess II the
basic long haul rat,sto the Pacific copst
The railroads answered Tins argument
by declaring that they could moi Increase
their rates to Pacific coast points because
they would moi ba ahle th,n IN tu,ef TN,
Uat.r r,D,n.titi,r I-nd.r tho Iut,r
state Commsrc, Couuission's order thrv
wers obliged n was said either f., in
crease their rates In Pacific points or
decrcnse their pres.nt rates 10 inter-
mountain points In either event. they
cont.nd.d n would amount 10 conGsCn-
tion.
The Interstate Commerce Commission
befor, ordering the reduction in tho
commodities rates fixed certain oxu,.ri-
mental arbitrary schedules and then
had the railroads keep their accounts at
these figures for "A certain number of
months The commission accepted the
figures for these months as typical Of tho
business for the wear and on the basis
of these figures ordered the reductions
which have now been held up hv the
Commerce Court. Tn" commission IN
handing down its finding in the Spokane
case declared that II was satisfied that
the reductions proposed were not un-
reasonable.
The reductions made in the Reno case
were on practically the same basis
The interstate Commerce Commission
ordered reductions 10 salt Lake City az
the same time that II handed down it's
findings in the Reno and spokane cases.
The Commerce Court has declined. how
ever, 10 order an Injunction in the salt
Lake case on the ground that only the
reasonableness of the rates are u,Irs-
toned in that case.
There have been evidences Of consider
able feeling on the part Of the Interstate
Commerce Commission over the action
OF the Commerce Court in reviewing some
of it's findings. Attorneys representinC
the Government have contended that