Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1915-12-12
No IrreaSe Allowed in NeWI
Me.icO or Several Other
W6tem States; Would Be-
Unreasonable.
COMMERCE COMMISSION
MAKES NEW RULING
Carriers Entitled to Reason
bIe Returns ON Large Out
byS for Improvement Of
Service, SAYS Order

10y sosHiae JOURNAL SPECIAL LEASED wjael
Washington, Dec. t1.-GenCra in
grasses in passenger fares on western
railroads. were authorized today by
tie Interstate Commerce commission
Amc of the increases for which the
nads asked were disapproyed, but
slch as were allowed will result in
In increase in revenue.
Proposed increases I'm Illinois. Wis
consn, the Michigan upper peninsula
Minnesota, Iowa Nebraska. Missouri
north Ok the Missouri river. and I'm
Kansas on and north Of the main line
Of the Union Pacific from Kansas
city to the Colorado state line We're
disapproyed, but the commission held
that am interstate basis Of "a cents
per mile was justified.
Tn Missouri, south Of the Missouri
river. and IN Kansas south OF the
main line Of the Union Pacific. pro-
posed Increases were disappr0ved. but
an interstate basis OF 2.6 cents per
mile was allowed.
New Mexico Exempted.
Proposed increases from points
within which now rates were author.
lied 10 points on the main lines in cal
ifornia, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Colo
RADIO Wyoming. New Mexico, ,Arkan-
saS, Oklahoma and Texas were pro-
nOunCed unreasonable where the fare
would be higher than that constructed
ON the rate fabric now existing to the
east rate of 2.5 cents a mile in
North and South Dakota and Q cents
in the states south and west was
approved.
Increases in fare to tho east Of
Michigan, Illinois. Iowa. Minnesota,
Wisconsin. Nebraska, Missouri and
Kansas based on rates newly author
ized in that territory were pronounced
reasonable.
The commission held ihat the erl-
dence in the case. in which nearly
fifty roads were involved and which
was part Of the whole western ad-
vance rate case, showed substantially
the following:
Great Expenses Incurred
That since 1900 the railroads have
made substantial improvements IN
passenger service for convenience and
safety at great expense.
That passenger service conditions
do not permit oC economies possible
in tho freight service and that the in.
creased cost not offset by those ocon'
omies which exist is entitled to con-
sderdti0n.
Thot passenger service in the west
ern territory is less profitable than
freight service and that the existing
rates are lower than those IN the
south east and west but that there is
some justification for that.
The decision rcpeals tho holdings
Of the recent advance freight rate
cases that the railroads have felt the
Increased cost of living and rccites
that the public has the right to eX-
pcct adequate, comfortable and safe
service The commission said
Reasonable Returns Necessary.
For such services and facilities
the carriers should be allowed under
reasonable fares TO earn a reasonable
return upon the property used I'm that
service. Neither competition nor the
unreasonable demands of the public
however, must be made the excuse for
waste and extravaganza in the pas
senger service
To avoid confusion of practice the
commission dismissed all the in
creases the railroads proposed and
ordered the filing of new tariffs en-
oodyng such increases as were al
lowed to become effective.