Walker Lake bulletin. (Hawthorne, Nev.) 1883-1926, 1920-09-25
Canuot Raise Rates

essy, mas denied the petition of the
steam roads throughout Nevada, Tor
an Increase OF 25 per cent 81 freights
20 per cent on milk and perishablcs
and a SO per cent raise OF Pullman
charges.
I The commission in denying this
! raise does so on the reasouableness q
! the charges, but the main issue is that
| covering the power OF the state COM
mission to regulate its interstate COM
merce In this instance the Nevada
COMMISSION takes the stand that the
state has forfeited nothing through
the passage OF the -Cummins
congressional act, which allowed the
,ntertate raise OF freights from the At
| ,antic 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
n this state
In the opinion the commission holds
that present freight and passenger
-ates are too high and in many in
| jiancs discriminatory and confisca-
ory Prompt action to bring about
reduction in passenger fares is
promised by the commission which
! states:
"Thcre is no justification for the
maintenance of higher than Scent fare
on main lines and 4-cent 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
,xtortionate and discriminatory trunk
inc passcnger-farc eXactions between
points within this state.
The commission compares Nevada
.ates with those in California, Oregon
md surrounding states and finds that
| he requested increase would raise
passenger rates in Nevada on main
ines to from as to IL cents per mile
against 80 a mile in the otter states.
Nevada, Arizona. and New MeSieo
lreIiie only states where the railroads
ttmept TO collect passenger fares in.
Excess of } cents a mile and these
state have pcttioned the interstate
commerce commission to reduce the
rates. A hearing will he held at Los
Angeles. September 22d, and the Ne
yada commission states it will have a
representative present TO submit argu-
ment and testimony
The ruling also refers to the statute
! limiting the power OF the. commission
| md states that Eve do not Understand
hat we can authorize inflexible hort
| .ontal increases" without determining
he effect upon both carrier and pub
ic of the increase on each commodity
The commission found that grant
ing the increase as asked would
place an additional tax OF $4S3,38S all
aually upon transportation in Nevada
| which is declared unjustificd.
The state commission holds flatly
that interstate commissions have no
authority to regulate traffic within
his state. The opinion states:
without the consent of the state,
| federal authorities may not constitu-
tionally regulate Nevada's internal
commerce-the adoption OF territorial
valuation and rate regulation to the
| contrary Notwithstanding.
"The territorial horizontal increases
n rates prescribed by tho commission
for interstate traffic has cast an I'M
reasonable and con,iscatory burden on
| interstate traffic originating within the
state, and would operate excessively
md discriminately on many lines Of
| traffic, for which we find no warrant
| in the laws Of this state. The inter
state commerce act is reciprocal in its
action and prevents the imposition O
unreasonable discrimination or undue
| ouruehS Deing cast upon state conn
merce by the regulation of interstate
rates, as well as burdens upon inter
state commerce flowing from the reg
alton 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 Il may confer juris
diction upon itself to say that rates
in another state are too low and must.
| therefore, be raised to the same level
without regard to any other consid-
eration--as has been so strongly
urged upon this commission Ivy the
carriers in this case"
---------ooo----
JRnitor.