New-York tribune., 1919-05-03
Telephone Rate
Raise Defended
BYQyOVern11lent
Brief Filed in the Supreme
Court in Case of Appeal
From South Dakota and
Massachusetts, Decisions

WASHINGTON, May 2. - The in
crease of intrastate telephone toll
rates by the Postmaster General was
defended in a brief filed by the gov
ernment to-day in the Supreme Court
in connection with pending appeals
from South Dakota and Massachusetts,
courts. The state authorities in their
appeals have contended that the in
crease was an undue interference with
their police powers. Arguments in the
proceedings will be heard next Mon
day.
The government in its brief declares
the suits instituted by the South
Dakota and Massachusetts authorities
to restrain the Postmaster General
from increasing the rates were in
reality brought against the United
States without it's consent and should
be dismissed The government also
contends that in taking over control
of the telephone systems of the coun-
try the. President placed them in the
hands of the Postmaster General as his
representative, under the broad power
given him by the resolution to manage
as he saw fit" and they thus were in
effect added to the postal service and
"became as much part of the means
of conveying news or communication
as the mail"
Not Police Matter
"The regulation of rates." the brief
said, "as an exercise of power is the
assertion of right to control q pri-
vate business affected with a public
interest and subject to a public use,
so as to subject the private property
to the public service upon the payment
of just compensation. To this end, in
order that the private right may not
be asserted to extort undue compen-
sation for use, the power is exercised
to regulate the price for use just as
it might be to regulate the price for
the property itself If the fec was be-
ing taken"
The government brief. prepared by
Solicitor General King, denies that
state police powers are "impaired or
affected by not submitting the rates
fixed by the officers of the United
States to state CONTROL" because not
only the police regulations of the state
do not affect rates made by the gov
crnmcnt itself, but the police power
does not extend to such subject.
"The public" 7he brief adds, has
acted and fixed the rate when the pub
lie officers of the United States fixed
It,
The Need for More Revenue
at seems clear that if Congress had
intended to confer upon the states
the power to regulate tho rates at
which the United STATES will furnish
telephone service it would not have
expressed that intention by reserva-
tion to the states of their police
regulations.'
when q private corporation leases,
for however short time, the property
OF another such corporation it is Ger
tainly with the expectation of making
enough from its operation TO pay the
rental and even profit to itself 1t
was therefore to be supposed that the
government would expect to charge in
the operation of these properties suffi-
cient rates to pay for the increasing
expenses Of operation and discharge
the rental which it was to pay 1t
would have been legitimate to have
even contemplated some additional sum
to reimburse the government for the
time of public officers consumed in the
work"
The government contends that state
public utility commissions were never
authorized when created by the states
nor since to deal with the rates of
pubic, utilities operated by govern
rOanfa1 oroyc;oc