RATE REGULATION tive control of rates, to be exercised through power to the Interstate Commerce Com mission to hear complaints and fix reme•dial rates — subject to interference by the courts, if at any time confiscatory rates are ordered by the Commission. This latter condition should, in my opinion, be omitted and the courts left with only such power of interference as their general jurisdiction gives them. It is a greater concession than their conduct in recent years entitles them to receive. If they successfully oppose the legislation now urged by the President the country will resort to government owner ship. One argument in favor of that is this: The railroads are now seeking to re tain the power to raise rates by degrees, as opportunities occur and the traffic will bear it, so as to pay 6 per cent interest on the railroad capitalization of ($14,000,000,000)
fourteen billions of. dollars — which will require yearly ($840,000,000) eight hun dred and forty millions of dollars. The rail roads are, however, not fairly worth over ($8,000,000,000) eight billions of dollars. If the United States were to condemn and take the roads at that sum the amount to pay the owners could be borrowed at 3 per cent and the yearly burden would be only ($240,000,000) two hundred and forty millions. This difference of $600,000,000 annually to the people who are now taxed $2,000,000,000 annually by the railroads may sometime be accomplished by govern ment ownership; and to the deliberate adop tion of that no possible constitutional or legal objection can be stated. It is a mere question of popular desire. WASHINGTON D.C., December, 1905.
