Rensselaer Republican, Volume 19, Number 38, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 26 May 1887 — INTERSTATE COMMERCE. [ARTICLE]

INTERSTATE COMMERCE.

The Interstate Commerce Commission has resumedits regular sittings at Washington. Wednesday they devoted some time to hearing John C. Gault, General Manager of the Queen & Crescent system, in favor of an application for the permanent suspension of section 4 of the law. He recited the effect of river competition upon the lines comprising the system in reducing cotton rates. Mr. Gault said that he believed in fixing rates that would be just to all, and that he would rather have a dozen thriving towns on his road than a large city. Gen. Black, Commissioner of Pensions, representing the Board of Managers of the National Soldiers’ Homes, asked that some arrangement be made by which the inmates of the homes might be permitted to continue the enjoyment of the half-fare rates on railroads. Commissioner Morrison intimated that the law d d not prohibit such a concession, but Gen. Black thought a statement by the commission would be necessary to secure the privilege. No final action was taken. Congressman Cabell, representing the Danville (Ya.) Board of Trade, presented a complaint of unjust discrimination against that town by the Richmond and Danville Railroad. Judge Cooley, Chairman of the Interstate Commission, has addressed a letter to J. H. Hanley, traffic manager of the Minneapolis and Northwestern Railway, defining the powers of the commission in certain cases. The letter is in reply to a telegram . urging that ass order be speedily issued relieving the road named from the provisions of the long and short htftil clause. Chairman; Cooley says the Commissioners feel compelled to withhold the order requested so that the matter may be more fully investigated than has yet been possible. He points out that previous to the passage Of the act many railroad including that represented by Mr. Hanley, had been m the habit of cbarging more for a short than for a long haul oyer the same line, in the same direction .and under conditions substantially similar, judging for themselves whether the circumstances and conditions justified such action. Congress, in passing the act, decided th it the rule should then after preclude this greater charge, !i nd in so doing it must be understood to have determined i that, in its judgment, any incidental in- | juries that might flow from the infprce- ■ meat of the general rule would be more I than counterbalanced by resulting benefits.