The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1916-12-08
new POLICY NEEDED
IN GOVERN MENT
RAILWAY CONTROL
IdpfMh0ss iHtEnseW,gsoeat
NyM BY Alfred ?. Then.
CREDIT MUST Be IMPROVED

Necessary to Secure Relief From
High Cost of Living May Thss Be
Provided For by the Railroads.
Washington, Nov. ga new policy
Of government railroad regulation,
based on constructive principles OF
hslpfulness and encouragement instead
Of upon principles OF repression and
punishment, was urged by Alfred p,
Thorn, counsel for the Railway EIscu.
tivss' Advisory Committee, the nrst
witness OH behalf Of tho railroads be-
fore the NewlaDds Joint Committee on
Interstate Commerce, which has insti-
tsss< u general inquiry int Tie prsb
bs.as Of railroad rsGalattsn.
1T - proposed By tia tsdAt rssssx-
sssa Of Congress" said Mr.. Then, ~
- i~ss a comprehensive staay Of Ne
whsAs ssbtsct 81 tpaAspsFsssesa, %
ns1ss q new ssssszxAsat, Afteg - ys~<u
- szpssaAs.t, q - kAstssy. ~ pros
nx es><isAsAs and n. f~s~~s sssss
s1asAsa - Psrnaasst and ssa<zsng
pevt sf ssvssnns~8 h A@srzoa xn4
tAak he Arst a~sv ~ ne sssrSsss h 30
The 1~ssss. That dety b 10 sAIsrs
rss~sassts facilities 81 rsassaa be
sssss aAd at rssssas BILE rates, and tASs
must be done before any private inter
ssts can be considered"
Certainty, Safety and ssffieisnoy.
Mr.. Thorn contsnded that the real In
tersSt OF the public is In being assured
OF certainty, safety and suff1ciency OF
transportation facilities. rather than In
rates. The first consideration OF the
public is to obtain transportation facili-
ties. What the cost is, Is I'm reality q
second consideration he said.
Mr.. Thorn proposed an increase OF
transportation facilities as a method
OF securing relief from the high cost
OF living. There have been less than
1000 miles OF new railroad construct.
ed In the United States during the past
year" he said, less than in any year
since 1S4S. except the period Of the
Civil War, and yet the cost OF living is
daily advancing owing to a shortage OF
supplies which might be remedied by
securing access to new areas OF pro
duction.
Credit Must Be improved.
This leads to the consideration as TO
whether railroad credit Is as good as
the public interest requires. 1t is i'm
possible for railroads TO earn enough
to supply the necessary new facilities
from current revenue. They must be
provided from credit. Investors can
not be coerced, but must be attracted"
Among the conditions affecting rail
road credit which deter investors be
mentioned the following:
First, Railroad revenues are not
controlled by investors, but are fixed
and limited by governmental authority
and not by one but by several govern
mental authorities, which do not recog-
nize responsibility for assured results
to investors and are uncoordinated.
Second, Railroads cannot control
and the government cannot and does
not limit the expense account.
Third, The present system OF regu-
lation is based on policy OF regulation
and correction and not on a policy Of
helpfulness and encouragement
Fourth, The outstanding obliga tons
Of the railroads have already exceeded
the financial rule Of safety and involve
q disproportionate amount Of obliga-
tons bearing fixed charges.
Fifth, The investor must accept a
subordinate obligation or security with
no assurance Of a surplus Of earnings
to support 1t.
Sixth, Other competitive lines Of in
vestment present superior attractions.
Seventh. The railroad business is
largely controlled by political instead
Of business considerations.
Look Forward, Not Back.
"We may debate about what has
caused the present conditions" said
Mr. Thorn, but we cannot debate about
what the people need. The President
has taken the view that we must look
forward In this matter and make a
fresh assessment OF circumstances In
order to deal helpfully and intelligent
ly with the problem. Abuses are
no more prevalent In the railroad bust
ness today than in any other business
humanely conducted. The great Ques-
ton now Is whether the existing sys-
tenn Of regulation gives the public re-
liable assurance Of sufficient present
and future railroad facilities.
Those wis oppose any change must
make their appeal on the ground that
the present systems assure the public
OF the continued adequacy Of trans
Vortation facilities. II they do not, no
argument based on the desira bility of
the present dual system of regulat ton
will be accepted by public judgment.
The question Of states rights is not
involved. II the regulation Of transpor
tation facilities privately owned should
fail government ownership must fol
low, and then all power Of the states
over the railroads would disappear.
LET us debate this question. then