| OCR Text |
Show SENATOR FORAKER ON GOVERNMENT GOVERN-MENT RATE-MAKING FOR RAILWAYS. Senator J. B. Forakor of Ohio is generally looked upon as the most Inflexible, In-flexible, and certainly ho Is tho most eloquent, opponent of tho president's ' '. railway policy in tho upper houso or tho federal legislature. His views on tho subject have been expounded in various ways and at divers times, but, perhaps, they have never been more clearly and cogently expressed than in a pamphlet with which, doubtless, senators and representatives aro familiar, fa-miliar, but which is relatively unknown un-known to tho community at largo. Conspicuous among the documents brought together in this pamphlet aro an open letter addressed to Mr. For-. For-. akor by tho Receivers and Shippers VI association of Cincinnati and tho sen- ntor's reply. Wo should mention that tho Receivers and Shippers nssocla-tlon nssocla-tlon comprises nearly 300 of the largest larg-est shippers in that city. In tho letter signed by their president, Mr. R. H. West, they mado a number of assertions asser-tions favorable to government rate-mnklng rate-mnklng and requested tho senator to answer a series of questions. After pointing out that Mr. Forakor was known to have in mind a plan of railway rail-way legislation which, in his judgment, judg-ment, Is better than the plan embodied embod-ied In tho Esch-Townsend bill, and to a large extent reproduced In the Hepburn Hep-burn bill, Mr. West directs the senator's sen-ator's attention to tho fact that, under un-der tho existing law tho courts have decided that', whllo It is permissible for several ljnes ,to make Joint through rates, they are not required to do so. Mr. West asks whether, under un-der tho plan devised by Mr. Foraker, tho carriers should bo required to mako reasonable joint through rates, and, if so, how? Then again, if, under un-der Mr. Foraker's plan it should be determined that tho rates from Cincinnati Cin-cinnati to Atlanta, Ga., were unreasonably unrea-sonably high and discriminatory, a.s compared with the rates from Richmond, Rich-mond, Va., to Atlanta, Ga., and the carriers wero required to mako a reduction re-duction in tho rate from Cincinnati, what, inquired Mr. West, would prevent pre-vent tho carriers from Richmond, Va., to Atlanta, from making a reduction corresponding to that mado from Cincinnati. Cin-cinnati. Mr. West also wanted to learn whether, upon complaint being filed and a hearing given, and a particular par-ticular rato having been determined to bo unreasonably high and ' excessive, exces-sive, or unduly discriminatory, It would bo possible, under Mr. Foraker's Fora-ker's plan, to substitute thorofor either a maximum, minimum, or absolute abso-lute rato to be- applied thereafter. Now let us look at Mr. Foraker's reply. Ho began by reminding his correspondent that in his speech nt Bellefontalne ho expressed the belief that there aro many abuses and evils to which shippers aro now subjected, and for which tho law should afford a ' speedy and effective remedy. Ho did not believe, on tho other hand, that It would bo effective or wise, or, In short, anything but disastrous, to confer con-fer tho rate-making power on the in- tcr-stato commerce commission. The LJ difference therefore between tho senator sen-ator and tho Cincinnati Association ot Shippers was simply ono as to what If should bo tho remedy for acknowledged acknowl-edged evils. Mr. Foraker had said at Bellofontnlno that to tako control of tho rate-making power Is to tako charge of tho rovenuea of railroads, and this means that tho government is to assume tho responsibility not only of determining what rato shall ' bo charged, but also, of necessity, how much money a railroad Bhall be allowed al-lowed to mako. Criticizing this assertion asser-tion in his letter Mr. West had said that no proposed legislation which ho know of would have any such effect. Tho Esch-Townsend bill, for instance, which passed tho houso of representa tives In tho last session of tho fifty-eighth fifty-eighth congress merely, provided for tho substitution of a reasonable rato for ono found by tho Interstate com-merco com-merco commission to bo unreasonable. That was not equivalent, Mr. West thought, to prescribing how much a railroad should earn. In his reply Mr. Foraker showed that conferring tho rate-making power on tho interstate inter-state comnicrco commission does mean that tho government is to assume as-sume tho responsibility of determining determin-ing not only what rato shall bo charged, but also how much monoy a railroad shall bo allowed to mako, because be-cause in effect this Is what tho United States supremo court held In the maximum max-imum rato case, and precisely what Governor Cummins of Iowa recognized recog-nized when, in his testimony beforo tho sona'to committee, ho stated that ho thought rates should be so adjusted adjust-ed as not to allow a railroad to mako moro than 7 per cent on its investment. invest-ment. Mr. Foraker went on to point out what seems to him the fatal fallacy fal-lacy of tho Esch-Townsend bill, or of any similar proposal to confer a rate-making rate-making power on tho interstate commerce com-merce commission. That bill was based, like Mr. West's letter, on tho assumption that it Is possible to challenge chal-lenge a single rato as unreasonable, have it condemned and substitute therefor another single rato. Tho senator does not believe it possible to do any such thing. Ho directs attention at-tention to tho fact, that rates so overlap over-lap each other and aro so Interdependent Interde-pendent that they aro woven together In a web that makes It Impossible to single out ono that is complained of and change it without at the same timo changing hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of others. By way of illustration il-lustration he takes the rate for the transportation of tho products of the cotton mills of tho south to Cincinnati. There Is a commodity rato of 49 cents from Atlanta to Cincinnati; but why is tho rate fixed at that figure? It Is thus fixed because of tho rate on tho products of the cotton mills of Now England to Cincinnati, and tho latter rate In turn is governed by tho rato from tho Now England mills to Chicago. It follows that If you raise or lower tho rato from Atlanta to Cincinnati Cin-cinnati there must bo corresponding changes on tho other rates mentioned, and these corresponding changes in tho rato on tho products of Now England Eng-land cotton mills will extend not only to Chicago and Cincinnati, but to every intermediate city and point. Tho senator submits that it is not a matter affecting tho revenues of tho railroads alono, but a matter of tho highest Importance to tho peoplo of Cincinnati and of every other community, com-munity, that rates should be bo adjusted ad-justed that tho competing products from different parts of the country can come into the markets of tho consuming con-suming communities and there enter Into competition with each other, to tho end that thereby tho consumer may benefit by the low prices that competition naturally brings. In other words, no consuming community wants railroad rates so adjusted that ono section of purveyors can bar out another. Tho consumer wants the commodities of both. Another striking strik-ing illustration was furnished by the case of New river coal. Tho local rate from tho Now river coal field to Cincinnati Cin-cinnati Is 95 cents a ton, but If tho coal bo shipped through to Chicago tho Cincinnati portion of tho through rato is cut down to C7 cents a ton. Mr. Foraker tells his correspondent that this Is not an arbitrary arrangement arrange-ment of tho railroads, but that they aro forced' to mako a low through rato to Chicago because tho Creator, In His omniscience saw fit to place coal fields in tho Hocking Valley and In Pennsylvania, Penn-sylvania, and In Indiana, and In Illinois Illi-nois and in Iowa, as well as In West Virginia, so that when tho coal of tho Now river district undertakes to com pete In Chicago with tho coal from those other fields It Is unable to do so unless It can obtain n rato that places It on at least a reasonablo approach to equality In their common market. If, therefore, the rato on tho Now river coal to Chicago should bo challenged chal-lenged Instantly would como up tho question, not whether that ono sluglo rate from point to point named was rcasonnbalo In and of itself, but whether or not It was reasonablo and just In comparison with all tho other competing rntcs. Thcro could not bo a change ot that rato without a corresponding cor-responding change in all tho other rates. In other words, tho theory upon which the Esch-Townsend bill proceeded is pronounced fallacious. There Is plenty of ovldcnco for tho soundness of Mr. Foraker's averment on this point. Ono of the men who appeared on behalf of tho shippers before tho interstate commcrco committee com-mittee of tho senate, which sat last year after tho closo of tho fifty-eight congress, was Judge S. H. Cowan of Texas, who represented tho Texas Cattle Receivers' association and tho Cattle Growers' interstate committee In tho course of his testimony, after giving an account of tho proceedings ho had been conducting against certain cer-tain railroads beforo tho Interstate commcrco commission to have a rato condemned as unreasonable, ho said, by way of explaining why so much time had' been occupied moro than a year that tho question whether tho particular rato complained of was unreasonable, un-reasonable, Involved a careful examination exam-ination of all tho rates In tho stato of Texas, In southwestern Kansas, In Colorado and In Arizona. Mr. West Is further reminded that In tho maximum maxi-mum rato caso cited by him the Interstate Inter-state commerce commission found it necessary in order to change the particular par-ticular rato complained of, to change moro than 2,000 rates, and ono of tho chief causes for dissatisfaction with their decision was that it did not change many other rates so as to mako them correspond. Judgo Cooloy, while chairman of tho Interstate commerce com-merce commission, declared that, if tho commission wero required to exercise ex-ercise tho rate-making power, it would In effect bo compelled to act as rate-makers for all tho railroads, and compelled 'to adjust tholr tariffs so as to meet tho exigencies of business, busi-ness, while at tho same timo endeavoring endeav-oring to protect tho relative rights and equities of rival carriers and rival localities. Ho recognized that, In a country so large as ours, and with so vast a railway mileage, tho task would bo superhuman. In tho maximum maxi-mum rato case, to which wo havo referred, re-ferred, tho United States supremo court said, In Its opinion reversing tho Interstate commerce commission, that thcro was nothing In tho lnterstnto commerce act nor was there, It may bo added, In tho Esch-Townsend bill requiring tho commission to proceed singly against each railway company for each alleged violation of tho act. Tho supremo court proceeded to point out that tho order of tho commission was in tho very caso at bar directed against a score or moro of companies, and assumed to determine tho maximum maxi-mum rates on half a dozen classes of freight from Cincinnati to Chicago respectively, re-spectively, to several specified southern south-ern points and tho territory contlgu-ous contlgu-ous thereto, so that If tho power existed, ex-isted, as It was claimed, there would bo no escape from tho conclusion that It would bo within tho discretion of the commission, of Its own motion, to suggest that the interstate rates on all the roads in tho country wero unjust un-just and unreasonable, notify tho several sev-eral roads of such opinion, direct a hearing, and, upon such hearing, mako ono general order reaching to ovory road and covering every rato. It Is just because tho exerclso of tho rate-making power cannot bo limited to a single rato, but must In every caso embraco hundreds, and possibly H thousands, of other rates, and, in tho H end, practically all rates throughout H tho Union, that Senator Foraker does H not deem it wlso to confer tho power H on tho Interstate commcrco commls- H slon, or on any other political agency ,H appointed by President Roosevelt or H by any other president, unless It can bo shown that thcro Is no other way H to remedy tho ovlls that are com- plained of. Harper's. H |
