The Birmingham age-herald., 1923-10-09
COMMISSION JO|NS' OTHERS IN APPEA TOsUPRE COURT.
Alabama Public Service Body Interested In Matter Of
 Definition Of Power
STATE CAPITAL BUREAU l
 THE AGE-HERALD

montgomery, J
 The Alabama public service com mission is actively interested in the matter of definition of tho power of state commissions to regulate utili- ties engaged in interstate commerce .as affected by decisions of courts in South Carolina and California. It was learned today that the Alabama commission has notified John E. Ben ton, general solicitor of the National Association of Railway and Uuptili- ties commissioners, to have the Ala bama commission included with those xof several other states on whose be- half he will file a brief before the supreme court of the United States on an appeal from decision of California court in the Los Angeles union station case, where the rullng of the California court is such as to seriously affect the powers of state commissions if upheld by the su- prerne court.
 Action is considered likely to be taken by the National Association of Railway and Utilities Commissioners, which meets at Miami December 4, looking to remedial action by Con gress to avert the lessening of power
 
 by court decisions.
 o O O
 Power Apparently Curtailed.
 The Alabama public service com mission today received from General Solicitor John F.. Benton of the Ma tionai Association of Railway and Utilities Commissioners a communi- cation in which he stated that the recent decision of the South Carolina supreme court, in effect, holds that state authorities are interdicted by the transportation act from requiring carriers engaged in interstate com merce to make capital expenditures. The Alabama public service commis- sion previously had been notified of this decision and has advised the South Carolina commission to carry the ease to the supreme court of the United States.
 In his letter. Solicitor Benton men tioned, in addition to the South Car olina case, the California case above mentioned, and a decision of sim ilar nature decided by a New York court, the two last named being, it is stated, less sweeping in nature than the more recent South Carolina de- cision.
 In commenting on these decisions, Solicitor Benton stated:
 Comment. Of General Solicitor.
 "Aii three, however, it seems to me, disregard an intended reserva- tion to the states of power to make orders reasonably necessary to en- able the rendition of proper intra- state service which is contained in Paragraph r of Section l of the in terstate commerce act, as amended by the transportation act 1t may be. hoped that if the cases are brought to decision in the United States su- prerhe court, such reservation will be recognized. Nevertheless, the coin ciderce of the highest judicial opin- ion in the three states mentioned. to the effect that the transportation act either very largely restricted. or wholly interdicted, state regulations requiring improvement of railway facilities, Is of such consequence and so likely to embarrass state regula- tory commissions in the performance of their duties, not only In those states. buy in other states, that | judge the5 question is likely to come before tho next convention of this association, whether or not imme- diate appeal should be made to Con |gress to remedy the situation by ex- peditious and explicit amendment, without awaiting the slow process of Judiclal construction upon appeals, with it's attendant uncertainty. ys a'lf anything is certain as to the in- .oHe VI AHy iSSlsldtlNe pOuN, l believe 1t not to be certain that Congress never intended to disable state au- tnorities from making requirem ents of the kind held interdicted by the south Carolina court, and if the transportation act is construed to have created such disability, l do not doubt that Congress will remove it, II proper appeal for relief is made When the supreme court of South Carolina holds. as it has held in this case, that powers reposed by South carolina in its state commission have been taken away by an act of Con gross, there must be something wrong with the language of the act, if that was not the intent, and Congress may well be asked to speak more ex- piicity.
 JOHN E.. BENTON,
 General Solicitor