New Britain herald., 1922-05-24
History of Case.

Washington. May 24.--The genera
 question of whether railroad trans.
 portatlon charges In the United States
 had attained levels too high for bust.
 ness and industry to support was
 brought formally before the Interstate Commerce Commission in the fall ot
 1921 on the commissions own motion although in response 10 nation wide commercial and political suggestions. Farm organizations and representa- tiNes Of Western states, particularly those in the grain producing area, ob- tained marked concessions about that time to which railroads voluntarily added ten per cent reduction on practically all agricultural products all over the United States except in New England.
 Before the commission, however, the railroad executives statistical ex- perts and attorneys, developed the argument that railroad earnings were insufficient to justify any general de- creases, at least until operating ex- penses and wage payments. as regu- lated by the railroad labor board, had been reduced. Every major in- dustry in the United States was rep- resented in the hearings, along with state regulative bodies, most of whom sought lowering of transportation charges but diverged In the degree of urgency which they suggested for the commissions action. The hear ings extended over four months.
 HOOyer'S Idea,
 Secretary of Commerce Hoover, ap- bearing at the request of the Cham Der of Commerce of the United States. proposed that the commission should make over the existing rate structures on the principle of applying propor- tionately lower freights to the bulky, low priced. raw materials of indus try and agriculture, such as coal, primary foodstuffs, and ores. Higher price finished materials and passenger traffic, MT. Hoover suggested, might bear the charges until such time as railroad revenues had developed to the point which would allow reductions without endangering railroad credits. Immediate and tangible cuts, he said, probably could not be made.
 The secretarys position contrasted radically with that of state commits sions, whose members centered a good deal of their attack on passenger rate schedules, which they alleged to be too high for the traffic, and in reality the cause of low railroad earnings.
 Steel Mems Stand.
 representatives of the steel and iron industry asked more stringent and immediate action. principally ar guing that the commission should re- move the entire 40 per cent increase put on Eastern rates on their pro- ducts in 1920. The National Indus- trial Traffic league, representing ship pers generally. took much the same position. The coal industry elabor- ated Mir Hoover's proposals, assert ing that basically coal costs influenced prices of so many other commodities that cuts in rates on it, particularly upon bituminous coal, would have a l beneficial effect. The farming inter- ests were not so urgent particularly | n view of the fact that agricultural 'ates went down while the discussion vas before the commission.
 Members of the commission them selves found much difficulty, it was indicated, during the weeks after the aking of testimony ceased, in work ng out a line of action. decision by April 1 was many more weeks in the making than even the raffic experts and the railroad ob- servers expected, but it was pointed ,ut that the record of testimony and he transportation subject itself were # immense magnitude. There was llso suggestion that delay might lave been desired in the matter to al- ow business conditions and price evels to stabilize further, and to see whether or not the railroad labor board might find it possible to allow wage cuts railroads were seeking.