Forest City press. (Forest City, Potter County, D.T. [S.D.]) 1883-19??, 1911-08-03
The Interstate Commerce La,u
BY JUDGE JuDsoN c. CLEMENTS.
Chairman of the Interstate Commerce Commission.

therefore of the utmost Importance. NOT
alone for the protection of carrier and
hlpper, but the consumer as well. that
the tribunal applying its Judgment i'm the
determination Ut these matters should be
just and Keep constantly in mind the ne
cessltN for sufficient earnings to provide
for efficient service to the public az we'll
as that the public should be protected
from excessive rates and unjust discrim-
nations.
Whlie the act as first passed denounced
rebates and unjust Determinations, it pro-
Nlued penalties only against carriers for
Grahtlhg rebates: there was no penalty
for shippers seeking or accepting unlaw-
fui concessions. But within a little more
una TWO years. upon the recommendation
or the commission and upon sound princi-
pie. congress provided penalties against
shippers as we'll. Soon thereafter a large
shipper and receiver OF rebates who was
Called upon to testify before the commits
SION as to these determinations refused
to do so on the ground of self-incrimina-
tlon. mus invoking his constitutional pro-
tectlon. notwithstanding that the act pro-
vlded that while a witness should not be
excused under such circumstances from
testlfylng. his testimony should not be
USED against him in any criminal prosecu-
tlon. The plea was sustained by the
onlteu states supreme court, which point
cd out. however. that the enactment of
a provision protecting Il witness alto
sether from prosecution on account of
any matter about which he should he re-
qutred to testify would not justify his re-
fusal. This resulted in the passage Of
another act In 1893 In conformity with the
suggestion OF the supreme court. Subse-
quently the constitutionaAity of this acl
was sustained by the supreme court.
In the meantime another constitutional
question arose involving the validity of a
provision authorizing the commission to
institute and conduct general inquiries
into the conduct of railroads. This pro-
vision was sustained by the supreme
court in a decision of five to three.
Thus for a number of years the au-
thority OF the commission to ascertain
the facts absolutely necessary to a lust
determination OF questions was impaired
and held more or less in allowance.
In 1897 came the decision of the SUI
Pfeme court to the effect that the law
did not empower the commission to pre-
scribe a future rate however unreason-
able 1t might find the existing rate to
be.
In 1903. following the exposure In a
general investigation by the commission
or wholesale rebating on important ship
ments. particularly in the northwest, the
commission attempted through the courts
to enjofn carriers engaged in such prac-
tees; and while this question was pending
in the supreme court, the IIlkins bill was
passed, specially authorizing such intunc-
lions and prescribing larger penalties for
DETERMINATIONS and departures from the
published rates. This latest enactment
considerably strengthened the law as to
Determinations because under the original
act 1t had been held by the courts that a
CORPORATION was nOf fn0icfo hIo opd fhot
proof OF a departure from published rates
established no offense, as that fact of it,
self did not prove MISUNDERSTANDING for
aught the court might know all shippers
might have been given the same unpub-
lislcd rate without inequality. The
~amendatory acts heretofore referred to
did not. however, strengthen the law
against excessive charges.
in 1906. the commission. pursuant to
a joint resolution of the congress-, insti-
tuted the well-remembered Investigations
into the relations of carriers to the coal
and Oil business and producers of those