Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 32.djvu/350

314 314 HARVARD LAW REVIEW rates, etc., left untouched by his orders, is largely academic. What has been said is applicable in some measure to this question, though in a case involving such a situation it would be impossible to rely on the proposition which is the central thought of this discussion, viz., that the Federal Control Act provides specifically the exclu- sive remedy for rates, etc., initiated by the President. But, if a complaint should be filed with some state commission, relative to a rate not initiated by the President, it would be a simple matter for the President to initiate a rate between the points in question; so that any difficulties which might be anticipated in this quarter do not seem to be of a practical nature. Finally, this construction is in furtherance of the provisions of the President's Proclamation of April ii, 1918, which reads as follows: "Until, and except so far as, said Director-General shall from time to time otherwise by general or special orders determine, such systems of transportation shall remain subject to all existing statutes of the United States and orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and to all statutes and orders of regulating commissions of the various States in which said systems or any part thereof may be situated. But any orders, general or special, hereafter made by said Director-General shall have paramount authority and be obeyed as such " — a provision which is almost verbatim the same as a corresponding provision in the President's Proclamation of December 26, 191 7. It should be noted in conclusion that the rates, etc., initiated by the President have superseded the previously existing rates, etc., both interstate and intrastate. Rates so superseded are non- existent and cannot be revived, but new tariffs must be published if the current rates, etc., are to be changed. It would seem to follow that if federal control were to come to an end without any new legislation the existing rates would continue as the lawful rates on intrastate traffic as well as on interstate traffic, and new tariffs would have to be filed with the state commissions. It seems inconceivable, however, that federal control could termi- nate without some additional legislation and such legislation will doubtless deal with the rate question. Henry Wolf Bikle. Law School, University of Pennsylvania. '