Atlanta Georgian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1912-1939, 1913-06-12
HONORS EVEN IN
RATE RULING,
SAYS FORBES
Business Expert Favors Placing
Railroads Under One Supreme
Federal Authority.
BY 3, G. FORBES,

cases means this, ss near as can
interpret il;
Neither the State nor the railroads
have won a sweepinq Victory, al
though tho State has been upheld in
certain important respects.
The States can fix rates within their
borders even although such rates d.
rsetiy Affect Interstate eommeree,
and these rates stand until the rail-
roads prove them oonFiseatory.
The Constitution, however, gives
Congress the power to secure "free-
dom Of Interstate commercial inter
course from State control and to pro.
vide regulation Of that intercourse as
the national interest may demand"
Congress Is the judge Of the neoes-
atty Of Federal action in matters at
Fsotins interstate commerce, but
until Congress acts, tho States may
act"
Railroads have under all eireum-
stances ~the right to receive Just COM
psnSation for the services given to the
public"
In the cases under review the Su-
prone Court holds that the Northern
Pacific and Great Northern railroads
have not proved that the rates i'm
posed by Minnesota are eonfiseatory
and therefore tho rates are upheld
this being a reversal Of the lower
courts ruling.
The Minneapolis and ST. Louis
Railway wins its contention that the
rates imposed upon Il by tho State
are oonfiseatory and, consequently,
cannot be enforced.
When State rates are condemned as
eonfiseatory, tho State authorities at
any future date, IL circumstances
change, may take fresh action 10
prove that the State rates would at
ford reasonable compensation.
The railroads will no doubt COM
plain that, under the Supreme Courts
decision, the burden falls upon them
o. proving that State made rates are
unreasonable and eonfisestory. II
would seem that this leaves the States
abundant opportunity to keep on
harassina tho railroads by imposing
now rate schedules, each Of which is
legal until the railroads can demon
strate in the courts that under such
rates the return upon capital would
not be reasonable.
Railroad batting will still be pos
sible, at least up 10 certain point.
In the end-after annoying, sSpen-
sive litigation and perhaps disorgani-
ration of business-the railroads can
count upon receiving equitable treat
rnent from the Supreme Court.
From business-not political
point Of view 4 is a thousand pities
that measures could not be devised 70
relieve the railroads from interior
snee by States with rates which az
feet interstate movement Of traffic.
As matters now stand each State
can prescribe any sort Of rates u
wishes, and il devolves upon the rail
roads TO 90 TO the trouble and eN-
pense Of proving these rates con-
Hsoatory before they are granted re-
lief
The Interstate Commerce Com
mission regulates our railroads Very
riaidly. Would it not be more bust
ness.like TO place the railroads as
oomoIstsiy as possible under this
ono authority and free them from tho
caprice Of every State in the Union?
REMEMBER. EVERY TIME A
RAILROAD is PUT TO THE tx
pENsE OF ENTERING A COURT,
THE BILL HAS TO BE FOOTED
BY YOU AND ME, BY THE PUB
Lie.
The railroads arc not isolated en-
titles, things apart from ourselves.
They are part and parcel Of the ma
tons necessary machinery, and the
public must pay every dollar con-
sur,sd in running the machine. Il
may DC NatuFdi WI oN~'A ~%SNN - ~~N'N
% compel local railroads TO carry its
frsiaht and its passengers at less than
cost, but the people of other States
must make up the difference unless
bankruptcy is to be preoiPitsted.
No railroad can spend 1o5 cents for
TRANSPORTING freight for which it re-
esivss only 100 cents.
States have sovereign powers of
course. and are rightly jealous Of
them. But no State can afford 70
tbrow its railroads into bankruptcy.
Railroads must be run, and run on
a paying basis if the alternative of
pgLlio ownership is to be avoided.
Would il not be possible to derise
some friendly arrangement tChereby
sroposed state rates. affecting inter
sfofe faTic could be laid before the
Interstate Commerce Commission and
an effort made to determine 'rhether
sch rates trouId De likely to be up
held as reasonable and HOu-c0Hfscd-
torn By the Supreme court!