The heart of the railroad problem: The history of railway discrimination in the United States, the chief efforts at control and the remedies proposed, with hints from other countriesParsons, Frank
History
The heart of the railroad problem: The history of railway discrimination in the United States, the chief efforts at control and the remedies proposed, with hints from other countries
Parsons, Frank
Railroads -- Freight -- Rates -- United States; Railroads and state -- United States
In the Boston _Transcript_ for February 24, 1906, President Hadley, of
Yale University, criticises the Hepburn Bill because it makes “the
decision of the Commission itself final on all questions of fact,” and
he predicts that if such a bill is enacted into law it will be a
failure, although he does not believe it practicable to obtain a better
measure now.
President Hadley bases his prediction of failure on his interpretation
of the experience of England. He says that the English Railway Act,
1873, “had many points of resemblance to the Hepburn bill. It provided
for a commission which, besides ascertaining the rates charged by
railroads and making reports to Parliament concerning their management,
should also be empowered to investigate complaints concerning unjust
rates of discrimination in facilities and give adequate and speedy
relief. It was intended to have the quick jurisdiction of these
Commissioners supplant the slow jurisdiction of the older courts.”
“The twenty-sixth section of the act undertakes to restrict narrowly the
opportunity for appeal from the judgment of the Commission. The
Commissioners themselves may state a case; on the case thus stated, and
no further, the courts on appeal may decide what is the law. This was
intended not only to shut out the retrial of questions of fact, but to
give to the Commission, as far as the circumstances admitted, the power
of deciding which were questions of fact and which were not.”
The Committee of 1883 is quoted as finding that “a case has been made
out for granting to litigants before the Railway Commission a right of
appeal,” and we are told that the Committee were “all agreed that the
attempt to prevent appeals from the Commissioners’ decisions had been a
complete failure.”
President Hadley further says: “Parliament has abandoned the theory on
which the act (of 1873) was based, because the courts did not carry out
the law, but insisted on retrying questions in their entirety, instead
of acquiescing in the attempt to separate the law from the facts.”
And we are told that “the evil effects of the attempt to give the
English Railroad Commission power of fixing rates did not stop here. The
attempted performance of this duty took up so much of their time that
they failed to perform other duties, which under more favorable
circumstances they might have carried out efficiently and usefully. They
did not have that influence on the formation of railroad tariffs which
their experience and high position would otherwise have secured.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account