Yerington times. [volume] (Yerington, Nev.) 1907-1932, 1920-09-22
NEVADA ROADS
CAN'T RAISE RATES

Carson Appeal: The public service
commission through ali opinion and
order written by Chairman Shaugh-
essy, has denied the petition OF the
steam roads throughout Nevada, for
an increase Of Is per cent OF freights,
20 per cent on milk and pcrishables.
and 50 per cent raise OF Pullman
charges
The commission in denying this
raise does so OH the rcasonablencss OF
the charges. but the main issue is that
covering the power of the state com
mission to regulate its intrastatc COM
mercc. In this instance the Nevada
COMMISSION takes the stand that the
state has forfeited nothing through
the passage OF the Esch-Cumfnins
congressional act. which allowed the
intertatc raise OF ircights from the At
lantic to the Pacific.
The opinion covers over fifty pages
and is probably the most exhaustive
review of the freight and tariff scheme
ever undertaken by any commission
in this state.
In the opinion the commission holds
that present freight and passenger
rates are too high and in many in
stancs discriminatory and confisca-
tory. Prompt action to bring about
a reduction in passenger fares is
promised by the commission which
states:
There is no justification for the
maintenance Of higher than Scent fare
on main lines and Accent on the
branches OF the trunk line systems
within this state. This commission
will. therefore. take prompt action to
bring about reduction of the present
extortionate and discriminatory trunk
line passenger-fare exactions between
points within this state"
The commission compares Nevada
rates with those in California, Oregon
and urrounding states and finds that
the requested increase would raise
passenger rates in Nevada on main
lines to from 48 to ~ cents per mile
against 3.6 mile in the other states.
Nevada. Arizona, and New Mexico
are the only states where the railroads
attmept to collect passenger fares i'll
excess of 3 cents mile and these
state have petitioned the interstate
commerce commission to reduce the
rates. a hearing will be held at Los
Angeles, September I'D. and the Ne
vada commission states it will have a
mcnt and testimony
The ruling also fcfcrs to the statute
limiting the power OF the commission
and states that I'VE do not Understand
that we can authorize inflexible hori-
zontal increases" without determining
the effect upon both carrier and pub
lie of the increase OH each commodity.
The commission found that grant
ing the increase as asked would
place an additional tax of S483, 1888 an
nually upon transportation in Nevada
WHICH is declared unjustified.
The state commission holds flatly
that interstate commissions have mo-
authority to regulate traffic within
this state. The opinion states,
Without the consent of the state,
federal authorities may not constit,s-
tionally regulate Nevada's internal
commerce--the adoption of territorial
valuation and rate regulation to the
contrary Notwithstanding.
The territorial horizontal increases
in rates prescribed by the commission
for interstate traffic has cast an I'm
reasonable and conaiscatory burden on
interstate traffic originating within the
state, and would operate excessively
and discriminatory on many lines of
traffic. for which we find no warrant
IN tne laws or TINS state. The inter-
state commerce act is reciprocal in its
action and prevents the imposition oi
unreasonable discrimination or undue
burdens being cast upon state COM
mcrce by the regulation of interstate
rates, as well as burdens upon inter-
state commerce flowing from the reg
lation of, or the failure to regulate
state rates. There is nothing in
the act which authorizes the federal
commission to fix high rate in one
state in order that it may confer juris-
diction upon itself to say that rates