Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-10-21

Moran said he had been out of the
liquor business and other racketS for
four years, and added, II have been
going straight and inted to GO
straight"
furthermore, If the Joint boards do not
function to the liking of some Of the
consumers, Federal regulation may, be
demanded.
How 1t will be possible to separate the
business of producing and transmitting
power which goes into interstate COM
merce from the business of producing
and distributing power in interstate
commerce Is q problem, too. A con-
Germ which does rs Der cent of its bust
ness within the State and sends Is per
cent Of its generated power into inter-
state commerce may find in the end
the Federal Government, If 1t under
takes to regulate the IS per cent OF its
business in interstate commerce, will
be regulating the other rs per cent.
Authority Questioned.
The proposition has been advanced in
some quarters that the Federal Govern
ment has no authority to fix the rate or
the price charged for electric power
which goes into interstate commerce.
A distinction Is made between the
price Of the electricity charged con-
sumers and the charge made for the
transmission Of the electricity from the
generating plant to the point Of distri-
button. The latter, it Is held, Is sub
iect TO Federal regulation, but not the
former.
The supporters Of this proposition say
hat the Government has the same right
to fix the rates for transportation OF
Alt d. Svaka ~&m%a
that it has to fix the rates for trans
portation by the railroads Of a pair Of
shoes or o ton Of coal that go into
interstate commerce.
They insist, however, that the Gov
eminent has no more license to NIX the
selling price of the mmodity-electrtc
power-than 1t has to say what the
pair of shoes shall be sold for or the ton
of coal to the ultimate consumer.
Paul Shipman Andrews, special as
sistant attorney general Of the State Of
New York, in certain water power mat
tiers, appearing before the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce
last May, when that committee was
considering q bill to reorganize the Fed
eral Power Commission, made q long
argument in which he held that the
Government could not fix the sale price
of electricity to consumers, any more
than it could fix the sale price Of shoes
coal or wheat, even though the cleo
tricity in question was moving inter-
state commerce.
\. Say Vast Difference Exists.
Members Of the congressional COM
nittee suggested that 8here Is vast
difference between the regulation Of the
price Of shoes and other such commodi-
ties and the regulation Of q public
utlity,1 such Is electric light and power.
They commended that the difference be-
tween . public utility and other BUSH
ness has been recognized in law and ~
the courts; that public utility was in
vested with . public interest which
Federal, added jurisdiction for control
in the interests Of the people.
Mr.. Andrews Yetort was to the effect
that while the Constitution contains an
interstate commerce clause, 1t does not
contain public utility clause" He
argued that all the powers which are
not specifically handed over TO the Fed
eral Government by the States In the
Constitution are retained by the States
themselves. The so-calied interstate
commerce clause Of the Constitution Is
very brief. 1t says: "The Congress
shall have the power to regu-
late commerce with foreign nations,
and among the several States, and with
the Indian tribes" That is all. Under
this constitutional provision, however,
a vast network Of laws governing inter-
state commerce has been built I'D In
this country. Under IL the Govern
ment has undertaken not only to regu-
late railroad rates, but has also under
taken to see that the people are provided
with pure food and drugs which go into
interstate commerce.
John T. Benton, representing the
State Public Utility and Railroad Com
missions Association, appearing before
the same House committee, was asked
he believed the Federal Gov
had authority 70 regulate the
price Of coal or shoes which went into
interstate commerce. His reply was: II
do not believe anybody knows the ex-
treme limit to which the power under
the commerce clause Of the Constitu-
ton may reach. Probably 10 years ago
suggestion that it reach TO
the point of authorizing the Congress
to regulate the cost Of bedding for cat
tie in the stockyards would have been
laughed at"
Challenge In Court Likely.
That the authority of the Congress,
through the Federal Power Commission,
to regulate the price" Of electricity en-
tering into interstate commerce may be
in the courts in the event
Of the enactment Of the CouZens bill or
q similar bill into law appears extreme
ly probable. It is q question which the
Supreme Court Of the United states
may have to determine in the end.
Electric power to many persons
means hydro-electric power. AS a mat
ter Of fact, however, electricity pro-
duced by fuel-using plants is great
part OF the production Of electric power
In this country. There are reasons
for this. The production OF power by
plants using coal and other fuel is con-
stantly being improved. Better and
better results are being obtained.
Hydro-electric power produced in this
country during the last 10 years has
between 81 and 20 per cent
Of the total power production. There
are evidences that the percentage will
be even lower. It is obvious, therefore,
that If the Government is to control
the rates of electricity in interstate
1t must not be confined to
dealing only with hydro-electric power,
but must have control equally over
electricity produced by coal and other
fuel plants.
(copyright. 1s30)