Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 23.pdf/237

 Latest Important Cases ever reversing a judgment of this character for contributory negligence when there wereLthree

dissents in this court. He concedes that instances may arise where persons engaged in lawful street occupations are so affirmatively careless as to preclude them as matter of law from recovering for injuries which they sustain through the negligence of others, but declares that the case at bar does not belong in that category. This is the precise point upon which we differ. He would be entirely right if the element of time could properly be disregarded; but we think that the time during which the plaintiff voluntarily blinded himself was too long to be excusable upon any reasonable theory of prudent con duct." Railway Rates. Return: not Allowed on Capitalization of ProﬁJs-——Carriers' Burden of Proof —Economy of Management. U. 5. By two unanimous decisions handed down

211

if it is to have the effect of increasing the rates upon the shippers over the original line. If the theory is to be recognized that by increasing the value of their property by putting back operating revenue into the property a carrier may as a legal right increase rates, then the shipper is worse off each time he pays a rate which allows a revenue over and above a reason able return on the original investment. . . . “The strength of the carriers’ case is in these

two contentions: -— I‘(1) That the roads are not earning a fair return upon the value of their property. "(2) That the cost of operating has increased because of increased wages. "It is true that cost of operation has increased by the amount shown as allowed to labor and addition to wages. But it is also true that operating revenues have increased so as to more than absorb increased operating expenses.

Feb. 23 by Commissioners Lane and Prouty,

Moreover, cost ﬁgures furnished would indicate

respectively, the Interstate Commerce Com mission declared against the proposed increases in freight rates in the Oﬁicial Classiﬁcation, and the Western Traffic Association territory, which the railroads in those organizations had been attempting since early last summer to put into effect. Practically all the roads east of the Missouri River and north of the Ohio were affected by the decision in the Official Clas siﬁcation territory case, and all the roads in the Great Middle West were similarly affected by the other decision. Commissioner Lane, who wrote the opinion in the Western Traffic Association case, said in part: "New improvements should bring new revenue. The risk of the stockholders investing their money in these improvements is the same risk that they took when they invested their original funds in the original property. But because traffic grows and a railroad endeavors to meet

that under skilful management an additional tonnage may be handled under a higher wage schedule without increasing the cost of the service given. “The Constitution of the United States guarantees the carriers against the conﬁscation of their property or the taking of the same without due process of law. Without this constitutional guaranty, which is distinctively American — for here property rights are more sacredly safe guarded than in other lands of more mobile law —the railroads of our country are protected from injury of any lasting character by the popular consciousness that they are essential to the industrial life of the people. To harm these roads is to injure ourselves. Our laws do not seek to establish dominion over private capital

it. are. rates to steadily rise?

The state of

Illinois may add a hundred millions in value toIthe Burlington road by a donation of water front for a terminal. Would this justify rates higher than before the giftiI "Our position is that a railroad may not increase rates upon shippers for the reason and as an outgrowth of the fact that it has accumu lated out of rates a balance of proﬁt which has been invested in the property. This investment must take care of itself; it must bring a return for itself, either in increased trafﬁc or in the lﬂlutttion of expenses of operation. There is no justification for the investment of this surplus

for any other purpose than to make sure against

injustice being done the public, and thereby make such capital itself more secure. We are dealing here with a difficult problem, involving multitudinous facts and an inﬁnite variety of modifying conditions, which make the establish ment of principles and the framing of policies a matter of slow evolution.

Congress has laid

down a few rules. These rules we are attempting to apply. It is not for us to say that we represent the Government and may have a policy of our own which in any degree runs counter to the power granted to us or the duty imposed upon us. The railroads may not look to this tribunal to negative or modify the expressed will of the Legislature. They have laid before us the facts and law which would make for a justification of their course in the increasing of rates. To our