The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1918-02-20
Appeal for Increase on Freight
Shipments Turned Down.
Decision of Commission Hand
ed Down Today Unanimous.
PLEA NOT IN PROPER FORM
Roads Did Not Comply With
Law in Their Petition.
Appeal Will Be Taken to
Courts, Lawyers Say.

Kansss railroads were today denied
the right to direct a 20 per cent hor-
izontal increase in intrastate freight
rates. The ruling in the case came
from the state public utilities commits
sion, following hearing in Topeka
last spring and summer. All rail-
roads in the state are affected by the
order. Following the ruling of the
commission. railroad attorneys stated
they would take the case into the
courts. They will probably seek to
consolidate the freight rate case with
| the passenger rate case row in the
federal court.
Applications of the roads are denied
on the grounds that horizontal in
creases in rates can be allowed only
on classified items which the COM
| mission finds inadequate and nom
compensatory. The commission did
not declare existing rates compensa-
tory. 1t held merely that upon the
whole record of the case and the
duties OF the commission under the
law. the railroads had failed to estab-
lish their claim and to justify the re-
lief prayed for.
Means Much to Shippers.
An approval of the blanket rate in
crease would have meant an expendi-
| ture of several million dollars a year
the time the application was filed
more than year ago placed the in
crease m intrastate freight revenues in
Kansas at s3.000.0e0 a year The 20
per cent increase was sought on all
commO 1itieS except oil and oil nrod-
ucts, for which increases of 33 to 121
per cent were asked In addition to
the 20 per cent increase as affecting
coal and coke. the Kansas roads
asked for a minimum rate of Is cents
i a Cfafa
The commission today held nv in
ference that the granting of the pro-
! posed increase in rates would result
In destroying commercial competition
in intrastate freight business Such
conditions. the commission held
would disrupt competitive CONNER
cial relationships to such an extent
as to render the increased rates nee
essarily unjust and discriminatory
and therefore illegal and void" The
railroads, however. held that the in
crease in rates was necessary in or
der to afford an adequate return to
the carriers from their Kansas freight
business upon the value of their prop
erty devote to that business
Plea Not in Proper Form.
1T is the view of the commission.
says the finding, that the method
ADOPTED py the carriers in presenting
their applications for authority 10
make changes in their schedules of
rates does not conform to the REQUIRE
ments- of the statute. This statute
provides that whenever any common
carrier governed by the act desires
TO make any change in any rate. joint
rate, etc, such common carrier shall
file with the public utilities comrnis-
sion a schedule showing the changes
desired to be made and put in force
: by such common carrier, and such
change shall be plainly indicated bv
' rT~x
ments or supplements to the existing
J tariffs, or in new issues thereof"
Ihere was the point where the com
; mission baked 1t held the carriers
! We're bound under the law to estab-
lish each classification senaratei,r
The preservation of a inst reIstior-
ship of rates furnishes a sound and
I reasonable justification for the oh
serVance by the commission of this
rule OF procedure" says the order,
Inc raiiroads. however. entered merely
into the question of business produced
in Kansas, revenues and expenses Of
eperadon. Without the esta tabIishmenf
or needed increases on each com
monty, the commission refused to
issue permit for an increase.
I Demand Passenger Hike. Too.
THE mere allegations that the nor
revenues of the carriers are insuf
. ficient, or that a 20 per cent increase
J., in revenues is necessary, even if sus-
r tanned by proof, does not present facts
: which would enable the commission
: to pass upon the reasonableness or un-
reasona bleness of the proposed rates
: when applied to specific classes or
e commodities the finding says
s Refusal of the commission to ap-
: prove the application for an increas Sc
= in intrastate freight rates follows
o action by the same body in denying
an application for an increase in in
trastate passenger rates. After more
: than two years of contention, a ma
$ jority opinion was rendered against
n the carriers by the commission. Thai
? case is now before the federal court
q 1t is probable action will immediateIy
n be taken by the railroads looking to
: hearing of the freight rate case in the
: federal court. In fact the passengel
!, and freight rate cases may be con.
$, solidated
Il II anticipate the case win be taker
a into the courts at Cnce." said Judgs
= w. r. Smith. general solicitor for the
!" Santa Fe. The case, in my judgment
will take the same course as the pas
senger rate case. which is now in the
hands of the federal court"