The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1911-10-10

The recently established court of
commerce will shortly pass upon a
question in which the relation of the
court and the interstate commerce
commission will be determined. The
question will con1e up on the hearing
of the appeal in what are known as
the Pacific coast rate cases. The
railroads hav appealed from the rate
fixed by the commission and ask the
court to set il aside.
The Pacific coast cases were based
on a peculiar condition. Primarily
il was charged by the compliments.
who were inland shippers. that the
railroads charged a less rate from
Mississippi and Missouri liver points to
the seaboard cities than they did for
the shorter haul to inland cities
through which the seaboard freight
u, had to he carried to its destination. 1t
was charged and not denied by the
) railroads that shippers in the inland
cities could have their goods carried
TO seahoard points and then shipped
back to their destination at local rates
at a total cost less than they could
/: have it shipped direct to its destina-
rion on the westward haul.
In defense Of the system of rate
making the railroads claimed that they
were brought into competition with
water transportation on the Seaboard
and thai they were forced to meet
! the low rates which the water car
riers maintained or cease doing bust
ness in the seaport cities. They con-
/ tended that while h conditions did
! increase the freight rate to the cities
near the coast. it did not affect those
far enough east to permit the back
haul to equal h direct n They
claimed, furthermore, hat if the
river to the coast rate were taken as
a basis and the rates to all points
made according to it. the rate would
be increased in all the territory ex-
cept that SO near the terminals that
the direct and back freights would
not exceed me direct.
in passing upon the case the inter-
state commission took into
consideration the competition of the
water carriers and the rates it fixed.
based upon the through haul. in
creased the cost of transportation in
about seven-eishths of the territory
covered by the lines in controversy.
Blu it lost the terminal business to
the railroads and at the same time
the export business. because the wa
ter carriers could carry those at a
less rate than the railroads. just as
the roads had found they could do
before the commissian heard the case.
The effect of the decision of the
commission was TO lower the cost of
transportation in a part of the ter
ritorE, to raise it in about
seven times as much as we'll as de-
stroy the terminal and export traffic
for the roads,. which. they claimed.
could he hauled at a profit wen at the
low rate because of the long haul
and no landings. The railroads con-
tend in their appeal. as they did be-
fore the commission, that the rates
established by it are confiscatory and
therefore unconstitutional. 1t will be
remembered hat Judge Sanborn in
the Minnesota rate cases held that
rates which were confiscatory-that
Is non-productive Of profit to the car
~rter-were unconstitutional.
The railroad press holds that his
confiscatory position of the interstate
commission is new and in
fact reverses its line of rulings ex-
tending hack to its inception. II the
court should sustain the
rate mad by the commission 1t will
lay down the principle that it will
not interfere with rates made by the
commission that do not have in them
some violation OF mandatory law. If it
should hold the rates confiscatory, the
court will become to the commission
what the supreme court is to h ap-
pellate courts OF questions Of consti-
~tutionality. At any rate the relation
ship of the two commerce bodies will
be defined and esta hlished.