j
fffjfe
fa
Ik
4
GEORGE W. BERGE, EDITOR AND PUBLISHER
Volume 18
Lincoln, Nebraska, May 25, 1905
Number 1
TTtTV
H V
i
i
TTt A TTATT TT
a mt r
Adopted by the Legislature in 1893, It Is Still on the
Statute Books of Nebraska and Can Be
People of the State should join in a demand that
the Attorney General take imme
diate Action
In Nebraska the time has come to deal justly but firmly with the railways;-
The time has come to make them subject to the people, by whom
they were chartered. The. time has come for the rigid enforcement of
existing law.
House Roll No; 33, known as the Newberry bill, enacted by the legis
lature in 1893, is still on the statute bopks. It was an act to regulate rail
roads, to classify freights,' to fix reasonable maximum rates and to provide
penalties for violation.
Throughout the state the status of this law is apparently misunder
stood. It is presumed by nine out. of every ten men that the maximum
freight rate law is dead; that it has been rendered absolutely null and void
by a decision of the United States supreme court. Such is not the fact.
Not only is the law on the statute books, but it can and should be
enforced.
The constitutionality of the law was tested by the railways. They
applied to and received from a United States district judge an injunction
preventing the enforcement of the law on the ground that it confiscated
property without due process of law, contrary to the Fourteenth amend
ment. The case was carried to the United States supreme court and this
decision was affirmed. "
In 1897 Attorney General C. J. Smyth applied for and obtained a modi
fication of the decree. In its syllabus the court said: " "
"If the circuit court finds that the present condition of the business
is such as to admit of the application of the statute to the railroad com
panies in question without depriving them of just compensation it will be
its duty to discharge the injunction herein granted and to make whatever
order is necessary to remove any obstruction placed by the decrees in these
cases in the way of the enforcement of the law." .
From this it is plain that the maximum freight rate law can be en
forced. The attorney general of the state, having regard for the fact
that industrial conditions have. vastly changed since 1893 or 1897, should
undertake to place the law in force and effect. What was confiscatory in
1897 is not confiscatory in 1905. If the application of the Newberry sched-.
ules took property without due compensation in 1897, it does not follow that
Its application would not give due compensation in 1905.
As a matter of fact the application of the law at this time is essential
to the welfare of the state. In the last Issue of The Independent it was
shown that the net profits of the Iowa roads in 1903 on their 9,719 miles of
road were $15,076,163.53, whereas the net profits on the 5,697 miles of rail
way in Nebraska were $16,425,416.77. .
The Newberry law was founded on the Iowa law and the schedule
of rates is practically the same. The Iowa law has worked well since 1888
and even in the hard times it was never declared confiscatory by a supreme
court decision. The greater population of Iowa per square mile has re
cently been assigned as the cause of lower rates In Iowa, but the foregoing
figures will 'show that in Nebraska with over 4,000 less miles of road and
a much less population per square mile, the railways reaped a greater
profit than they did in Iowa. The Iowa roads in 1903 made a net profit
per mile of $1,552.13, while the net profit per mile of road In Nebraska was
-
$2,883.17. These figures would indicate that the railways could stand a re
duction of from 40 to 50 per cent in freight rates in Nebraska. The New
berry law provides for reductions that would range from 20 to 35 per cent
and In some instances a little more. & .
The enforcement of the maximum rate law wuld make the proposed
special session of the legislature unnecessary. The friends of railway regu
lation in Nebraska can not regard the proposal as anything bit a farce. The .
personnel of the legislature would be the same. The demand for rate reduce
tions is no greater now than it was during the regular tession,. and the
demand was so great then that the members of the legislature displayed the
utmost insolence and temerity in ignoring the wishes of the people. But
it was scarcely to be expected that men who obtained their election through
the ' machinations of the railways -would enact legislation unfavorable to
the railways. Is "there any more likelihood that these men will enact
the required legislation in a special session? Will these men ride to Lin
coln on free transportation and dare to pass any measure that would give
offense to the railways? , Let not the people of this state be so easily
hoodwinked. : ,
It has been estimated that a special session would cost about $15,000.
While this is an item the people should take into account, especially a
there is so little chance of effective legislation, yetit is inconsider
able as compared wthi the expense the state must shoulder in the litigation ,
that will follow any railway legislation. One Lincoln newspaper has de
clared that the talk about an expensive special session and the cost of sub
sequent litigation is "a railway bluff," which will not frighten the people of
Nebraska. That sounds extremely well, but why should the people of
Nebraska hold a special session to enact railway legislation when they have
on the statute books a law which can be enforced and which will give them
the desired relief from the oppressions of the railways in the matter of
freght rates. It is true additional legislation is needed to deal
with the free pass question and with other features of the railway prob
lem, but there has been no suggestion from any source .that the special
session do aught but enact a maximum rate law.
The only measure favorably mentioned by the advocates of a special
session Is the commodity rate bill, which provided for a blanket reduction
of 10 per cent on twenty-seven articles. This measure, fostered by the re
publicans, wa3 introduced by a special committee. Its constitutionality was
doubted by men of all parties and the members of the legislature treated
the measure as a joke. But this is the bill which those who' support the
special session demand should be enacted into law. They now assert vehe
mently that it is constitutional. , But even if it were constitutional the
railways would test it by tedious and costly litigat'on.
On the statute books of the state there is a law that has already been
in litigation. It has stood the test and can still be applied if the attorney
general will take the necessary legal steps. This is his duty and
the people of the state should join in a demand that the Newberry law be
enforced. - ,.
On another page or this issue will be found the text of the maximum
freight rate law approved April 12, 1893.
RUINOUS PARTISANSHIP
If the people are to triumph in their contest with the railways they
must forget partisanship and abandon petty politices. By skillful appeal
to party jealousy and party pride the railroads of Nebraska have frequently
succeeded in warding off restrictive legislation. Whenever necessary thej