The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-12-02
RAILROAD FREIGHT RATES

While ultimately the questions dis cussed in the Forum of the People today by Mir. w. L. Mapother, president of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Com pany, must be settled by the rate com missions, it is obvious that the public can- not be too closely informed as to the real status. The Age Herald is convinced that if rate structures were left to the railroads the people would have poor shrift. The carriers are placing their own interests first, as is but natural.
 It is quite true that it would require many volumes to state the history of all the different rates in effect in Southern territory. There are many sorts of rates in existence. In fact, the present rate structure may be appropriately compared to the topography of the country itself, i. e., it is full of hills, mountains and paying standpoint, are on the mountain tops while their competitors are down in the valley. It was just such situation as this that caused the sentiment of the country to crystalize in favor of law that would correct it. Congress, in re- sponse to this sentiment, passed the first long g-and-short haul law, known as the fourth section of the Act to regulate commerce., in 1910. Those who advo- cated such a law felt-and justly so when the intention of the amendment was clearly apparent-that it would ac- complish the desired results and remove the discriminations and preferences that had been holding back the development of the interior points. The carriers inn mediately protected the status quo by applications for relief from the pro- visions of the amended act. This situa- tion continued until the demand from the public for relief became so inshstvnt that Congress amended that particular section of the law again on February 28, 1920, making it more rigid. The general relief expected has still not been ex- tended, and Congress is now seriously considering the enactment into law of the Gooding bill which would forbid any more relief against the application of
 
 MT Mapother discusses in detail some of the features of the Meridian Rate Case, which we have previously referred to. That case was mentioned because it represented typical illustration of the manner in which the provisions of the Act to regulate commerce are being ad- ministered in Southern territory. Meri- dian complained that it was being un- justly discriminated against by the ex- istence of higher rates across the state line into Alabama than certain cities in this state enjoyed, and the Interstate Commerce Commission felt in duty bound to make a rigid application of the prin- ciples of the third section of the law and order into effect the same rates mile for mile between Meridian and certain Alabama cities to a large section of the state. The carriers who were defendants in that case (Mr. Mapother's railroad was not one of them), appeared to welcome the opportunity to disrupt our state rates and adopted such an attitude throughout the case that the Interstate Commerce Commission in it's decision stated that they were defendants in name only.
 The thing that the public cannot un- derstand is that, whenever discrimna- tions and preferences are mentioned, the carriers point out and emphasize those which relate to state rates versus inter- state rates, and advertise their readiness yhoy, hn ot O1 bodes authorize it, to correct the situa- tion, usually by increasing the state rates, while they continue to ask for re- lief from the removal of discriminations and preferences in the interstate rate structure It is difficult, also, to under stand why the federal commission ad- ministers so religiously the provisions of the third and thirteenth sections of the Act when the issue involves the relation ship between state and interstate rates, but continues to postpone, at the request of the carriers and against the protest of representatives of the public, the en- forcement of the letter and spirit of the fourth section of the same Act.
 The truth of the matter is, we have been treated to a fragmentary enforce ment of the provisions of the federal law in Southern territory. Many excuses have been offered therefor, just as Mr. Mapother mentions in his letter, but it is a fact nevertheless. Our public service commission is proceeding with the per formance of it's duty in the reorganiza- tion of the rate structure of the state in accordance with this principle, but it is being hampered by the presence in a large section of the state of the rates ordered into effect by the Interstate Commerce Commission in the Meridian rate case. It is Iorced to go to the fed