Show DECISION NOT CORRECT View of Governor Hadley Who Prosecuted Case for State Jefferson J ferson City Mo March 8 Governor Hadley Hadle did not appear surprised when Informed that the ns Jer rate law had been knocked out by Judge Judg McPherson in the United States Stales circuit court at Kansas Kanea City All I 1 can say at this time saM Id ij the governor is jg that the decision Is not a correct one It does oes not end the fight however The state will surely surel appeal to the United States supreme court Of course this question is in I the hands of the attorney general Commenting at some length on the de decision decision decision Governor Hadley said While hiie the decision of Judge McPherson son is simply the opinion of oC on one judge judg It must be accepted as the law Jaw until the questions involved are submitted to the supreme court of the United States That I think the decision is wrong wing goes without saying The claim that the rates fixed by b the freight and passenger passenger ger er rate laws Jaws were unreasonably low and therefore WItS was based upon expert testimony as to how the common expenses should be divided be between between between tween state and Interstate traffic The theory of the railroad experts is that the tile expenses common to the state and In Interstate Interstate interstate traffic should be divided In pro proportion proportion proportion portion to the revenue produced by the two classes cla of or traffic with an added in increase increase crease of co t for the doing of state bus bps business iness in Wrong Theory This theory seems Ems to me manifestly wrong and absurd as a its Ite necessary nece and logical result is that the higher the rates and the greater the revenue produced by b state traffic the larger would be bl the amount of or expenses expense assigned to that traffic traffic traffic fic A number of the for the railroads testified that the only anI way Way that the rates for the state traffic could be made remunerative would be to make them so EO high that they would be pro prohibitive prohibitive prohibitive It lt would therefore be just Juat as asfor easy eRle for the railroads to prove by this theory eory that the th cent law was wan at un unreasonable sona ble bie as to prove proe that the law was too low The state concedes that the ex expenses exI expenses I of or doing state business bu should be beI I determined on the theo baste basis of cost coot of ser service serI service vice rendered to the two classes of traffic traffic I fic lie The question as to how those ex expenses expenses expenses should be divided d was as the one controlling question involved in I the lit litigation litIgation So it is apparent teat these laws which were regularly enacted are declared inoperative on a theory sUp rt ed alone by b the testimony taU many of the expert pert witnesses So long as liS this thi method ob obtains obtains talus the right of the states stats to regulate the charges chares of public service corporations RII doing business therein amounts to but little or nothing |