Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-06-11
rate LAW RULES
/ AGAINST STATES
Supreme Court Recognizes the
Railroads as a Single System
of National Highways.
MUST BE OPEN TO THE
PUBLIC ON EQUAL TERMS
Affirmation of Power of the
Federal Government Most
Important Suggestion.
Star Bureau.
Metropolitan National Bank Bldg,
NASHTNCnDN I..u.. II

metropolitan National Bank Bldg,
WASHINGTON june II.
II On the surface the decision of the
s Supreme Court in the Minnesota rate
case seems perfectly simple, and very
Important It is probable, however,
that its main Importance lies In its
suggestion rather than the issues
really decided, and that its simplic-
8 ity does not go far to straighten out
& the most confused problem asso-
3, ciated with railroad rate regulation.
The court says that the States.
4 either by direct act of Legislature or
through commissions may regulate
and determine rates for freight and
pa ssenger traffic within the States.
and that the Interstate Commefce
8 Commission, under present laws, can
s not interfere with interstate rates so
8 arranged. The States, though, are
limited in making rates, just as the
Interstate Commission is limited.
Rates must not be so low as to be
confscatory. Whether or not they
are SO low as to be confiscatory is a
4uuestion OF fact to be ascertained by
s the courts in the case Of each rate
4 made.
a His New York Decision.
Cufiously enough, it was Justice
E Hughes who rendered the decision
declaring valid the two-cent mileage
+ laws. of a number of States-the same
Hughes who, as governor of New
York, vetoed twe-cent mileage law
passed by the Legislature of that
State. AS a result of Hughes's veto
the railroads In New York still
charge what they please for railroad
fares.
Minnesota, through it's Legislature
and commission, directed a general
reduction of freight rates and made
two cents a mile the maximum pas
senger rate in the State. The ST.
preme Court says the State had the
power to do this. 1t then proceeds
ito find that in the case of one rail-
road in Minnesota the two-cent mile
age Is eonfiscatory of the railroad s
property, while in the case of other
railroads it is not.
On the whole, the court decision
does not go very far to simplify the
question of how rates are to be reg
ulated 1t provides no rules by which
il may be said on what basis rates
shall be made.
Problem for the State.
In ascertaining what an interstate
rate should be, each State must.
where the road affected does both an
intrastate and interstate business,
divide and apportion the earnings and
expenses of the road between inter-
state and intrastate business. The
experience of State regulation is that
the only way this apportionment can
be made is by arbitrary rules, con-
serning the Justice of which there Is
plways doubt.
There has been much conflict be-
tween State and interstate regula-
fion of railroad rates. While the
newest decision affirms the power of
State regulation. it is not likely that
It will prevent further conflict of
this kind, nor is 1t likely that the
decision will do much to prevent
endless litigation concerning each
rate decision made by State.
The single big. important sugges-
ton in the decision is the affirmation
of the power of the Federal Govern
ment to regulate both State and in
terstate rates, whenever Congress
sees fit to pass laws giving the Inter
state Commission such powers. 1t Is
likely that this affirmation of the
Federal power will go far towards
shaping public sentiment in favor of
placing the entire question of regu-
lation in the hands of a single body.