The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1911-07-31
MUST CUT RATES
Communication Fare Collected by
the Pennsylvania Railway
At New York City Declared to
Be Too High.
Ice. ISSUES AN ORDER
Permitting Other Roads to In
crease Their Rates.
Jurisdiction in the Case Had
Been Questioned.

Washington, July 31.-Proposed in
creases in the commutation passenger
fares by the leading railways operat-
ing In and out of New York City today
were held by the interstate commerce
commission to be reasonable general
ly. except in the case of the Pennsyl-
vania railway. whose Communication
rates are declared excessive and are
ordered reduced.
Against the Pennsylvania road
specific order is made by the commits
sioner requiring it to desist from ex-
tracing its present Communication fares
to and from New York city by Sep
tember 1 and for not less than two
years thereafter For monthly
sixty ticket between New York
City and New Brunswick. n. J.. the
Communication fare is fixed at not to
exceed $40 cit is now $12) and the
road is ordered to readjust it's com
mutation rates to and from other
points in conformity with that fare.
In particular instances on the Erie,
the LackaWanna and the West Shore
lines the commission finds that the
Communication fares are excessive in
that they exceed naturally the charges
of other roads for substantially the
same service. No order is made in re-
spect to these isolated cases, however.
1t Is Unanimous.
The opinion of the commission was
prepared by Commissioner Harlan and
is the unanimous expression of the
body. The case=pOpularIy known as
been before the commission for more
than a year. Aside from affecting di-
reCtly nearly half a million commut-
ers in and near New York. the princi-
pies enunciated through the opinion
are of far reaching Importance, as
they Immediately concern railroads
and commuters in every center of pop
ulatiOn in the country. While the de-
CisiOn deals positively only with the
Communication situation in and about
New York inferentially communication
fares from and to Chicago are used by
the commission for com Darative pur-
poses, the advantage of the comparison
being in favor of the Chicago lines.
What is regarded as the most impor-
tant holding of the commission from
the viewpoint of the railways is that
it takes full jurisdiction over all com
mutation rates and assumes, under ex-
listing law, the power to regulate those
rates precisely as it regulates straight
passenger fares and freight rates
The respondent railroads in this case
denied the commissions authority to
assume such lower maintaining tnat as
communication fares W ere far lower than
ccded to be reasonable and that, as all
commuters were treated with absolute
equality the railroads right TO ad-
just communication rates without inter
ference could not be questioned With
this view, the commission is rot in
accord. The commission admits that it
is probably true that a carrier cannot
be compelled to put communication ser
vice and Communication rate into opera
tiCn, but Commissioner Harlan So VS.
a. Er,fA
ular communication service. such as is
shown Of record on the part of each
of the defendants in this proceeding
the power as well as the duty of the
commission under section TO examine
into The sasouableness Of the charges
cNactod, when complaint has been made
seems to be beyond question"
Has Grown Tremendously
The opinion discusses exhaustively
the history Of Communication. indicating
Its tremendous growth in the last few
years. Admission is made that the
railroads have been put to immense
expense in caring for the service, the
record of the case showing that the
roads had expended tens of millions
of dollars practically in facilities for
handling this traffic.
on the other hand it was shown by
the commuters that, through the
medium Of communication, large and
prosperous communities outside OF
New York had sprung into existence
and even now are developing ra pidlv
TO the profit Of the railroad railroad
not only from passenger but from
freight traffic.
The commission holds. hOWevea-. that
"the defendants are fairly entitled 10
some recognition OF their expenditures
and of the resulting Improvement n
the service" and generally the pro-
posed fares are approved except as to
the Pennsylvania and other instances
mentioned.
As to the proceeding against the New
York New Haven & Hartford. no ac-
fion is taken. as the commission has
no adequate information. In view Of
the investigation being made by the
New York commission into the COM
mutation fares of the New York Cen
tral. that matter is reserved