can be possessed of sufficient understanding to govern all the traffic conditions of the entire United States. If there are such men they are not the kind generally found on governmental administrative agencies. They are too busy ac quiring such knowledge to engage in politics." RECOMMENDATION IX. EXCESS INCOME. G. S. Brown, president, Alpha Portland Cement Co.: "I have not yet gotten to the point where I can bring myself to approve of taking money from a strong, well-equipped, and well-managed organization and giving it to one which may be inefficiently managed. "Our objection is against the method proposed rather than the principle which you have enunciated. As a fact we do not object to the principles of expressed in your letter under one and two, but are in favor of them. We do question very much the means which are proposed by the National Chamber of Commerce to obtain the results which the association stands for." D. E. Felt, president, Felt & Tarrant Manufacturing Co.: "I am opposed to Recommendation IX because I don't believe in taxing efficiency to promote or assist in the preservation of inefficiency. I am unable to picture in my mind a condition corresponding to Excess income' in the sense it seems to be used in the question. "I believe that the best way to insure proper and economic development of new territory and railroad extension and betterment, is to let those who take the risk have the chance to realize all the profits that may result therefrom, in case there are profits, no matter how large they may be. I believe that from an economic standpoint that system will bring the greatest good to the greatest number." J. E. Capen, director, Macbeth-Evans Glass Co.: "We are flatly opposed to this recommendation. We believe that every railroad should own its own earnings, provided the public are granted adequate facilities and service at a not excessive cost. Otherwise there will not be much incentive to build a railroad like the Pennsylvania Railroad, which was recognized as the standard of the world. In fact, under this plan, the railroads will be run with about as much efficiency and regard for the public as they are being administered now by the Government." Chas. S. Keith, president Central Coal & Coke Co.: "I am opposed to this on the theory that no agency of Government has the moral or constitutional right to invade the property rights and take from a prosperous person property or income to replenish the coffers of one who is not so successful. Any attempt to invade property rights, constitutional rights, or personal liberties should be strenuously resisted by all American citizens. It is our patriotic duty to do so, and this recommendation is in this respect unAmerican and unpatriotic, as well as socialistic, and tends to destroy individualism and personal initiative." RECOMMENDATION X. FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION BOARD. R. P. Lamont, president American Steel Foundries (Col. Lamont having written in on his ballot the words, "With veto power over the Interstate Commerce Commission"): "Even the present Interstate Commerce Commission, with all the experience they have had in recent years, apparently has some members not in favor of giving the railroads an increase in rates. I believe that some provision should be made to compel the commission to adjust rates so that they will produce the revenue necessary in the public interest." Geo. G. Lobdell, president Lobdell Car Wheel Co.: "I think that all the powers and duties of the proposed Federal transportation board should be exercised by the Interstate Commerce Commission by increasing its membership if necessary; and if so, a new board that might possibly conflict with this commission would be unnecessary. Chas. A. Keith, president and general manager Central Coal & Coke Co.: "The problems involved in this section provide for a policy to promote de velopment of a national system of rail, water, and highway transportation and articulation of all transportation facilities.' The language of this recommendation is so vague and indefinite that I do not see how we could vote either in the negative or affirmative. As an illustration, to promote development of a national system' means what? Does it mean governmental ownership of the * * * ar transportation systems; if not, then what? Second, to promote ticulation of all transportation facilities.' Again, what does this mean? It may be assumed that the intended meaning is to permit free interchange of cars between connecting lines and exchange of motive power as the requirements of traffic necessitate. On the other hand, the committee's recommendation could easily be interpreted to mean the interchange of use of main lines or sidings and terminals, and, consequently, an articulation of these facilities. would produce chaotic conditions of operation, adding additional unnecessary burdens on the public. Therefore, because of its vagueness and indefiniteness we should vote against this recommendation as a vote in favor thereof might be in error." RAILWAY BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, Hon. JOHN J. ESCH, Chairman House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. ESCH: Shippers' views on pending railway legislation were the subject of a colloquy at your hearing on September 15, so significant that I offer you comment and further information upon the same subject. The witness was Mr. Guy M. Freer, testifying as president of the National Industrial Traffic League. Mr. Freer in the course of his testimony and colloquy made these two statements: 1. "We earnestly insist that Federal regulation of common carriers be vested in the Interstate Commerce Commission exclusively and protest against legislation investing regulatory authority in whole or in part in any other governmental department or agency. The ** * * objection would apply to the proposal to create a transportation board." * * * * * 2. "The members of the National Industrial Traffic League are the men who are employed by the chambers of commerce. When they act they have not gone back and consulted all their people. The views that I present represent the views of the members of this association. They do not necessarily represent the views of the people who have employed these men." Appended is a transcript of the stenographic report from which these extracts are taken. Congress in its endeavor to interpret correctly the opinion of those directly concerned has labored under the disadvantage of seeing the traffic manager only and hearing the traffic manager's voice only, when the opinion of "the shippers" purported to be expressed. The Interstate Commerce Commission has had as its primary and accustomed task the determination of what may be termed traffic matters. Similarly chambers of commerce and individual establishments which ship or receive freight have maintained traffic bureaus or traffic departments whose primary and accustomed task was to carry on litigation or negotiation involving traffic matters. Thus both the Government and the shippers and receivers were permanently organized to deal with routine traffic matters. The Government, through the legislative branch, is at present engaged in the endeavor to undertake an entirely different task, supplementary to the first— the task of restoring and maintaining railway credit and railway development. In this the Interstate Commerce Commission has thus far refrained from cooperating and made evident its belief that no change in governmental policy is desirable. The bill sponsored by the commission merely imposes new restric tions and responsibilities upon the carriers. The shippers are endeavoring to establish agencies through which to cooperate with Congress in this undertaking. President Freer in response to a question by Representative Winslow, of Massachusetts, said: "You take the chamber of commerce, with a membership composed of bankers and business people, and they do not feel, as we do, that these questions are traffic questions. They feel that they are questions that ought to be settled by the business people themselves, and not by somebody whom they have employed to handle traffic and transportation questions." He might have added that a number of leading organizations, notably the Chicago Association of Commerce and the Illinois Manufacturers' Association, have placed the consideration of general railway legislation in the hands of a committee entirely independent of the standing committee on traffic. Mr. Freer stated that "quite a number of our members have been consulted by their local organizations with respect to the referendum of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States * and have expressed their views on various features of that." One of these features was the creation of a transportation board, which the traffic managers opposed. The difference of horizon between the traffic managers and the business men was shown in the rejection of their advice, the vote on the creation of a transportation board aggregating 1,197 in favor and 244 opposed. Mr. Freer, whose individual occupation is that of secretary of the Central Coal Association, with headquarters at Cincinnati, was formerly for a number of years traffic manager of the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce and Merchants' Exchange. He was reelected to the presidency of the traffic league with the explicit aim of retaining his leadership during this period of railway legislation. This esteem and appraisal, I am informed, is reflected in his position among Cincinnati business men, who have given many and continuous evidences of their confidence in him where traffic matters are concerned. The members of the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce and Merchants' Exchange were quite familiar with Mr. Freer's views, which had been expressed several months previously through the traffic league and otherwise. They cast their 10 votes solidly in favor of the creation of a transportation board. The vice president of the league is W. H. Chandler, manager of the transportation bureau of the Boston Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Chandler has been regarded, I am told, as the obvious next president of the Traffic League. In Boston we are informed that the confidence of the business men in his ability and judgment in handling traffic matters is what would be expected in view of his long continuance in his present position. On the recommendation to create a transportation board in the national chamber referendum the Boston Chamber of Commerce conducted a referendum among its own members and a questionnaire among other business bodies throughout the country. It then cast its 10 votes in favor of a transportation board. One of the most active founders of the Traffic League and for its first four years president and now a member of its legislative committee is J. C. Lincoln. manager of the traffic bureau of the Merchants' Association of New York. That body cast its 10 votes in favor of a transportation board. Members of the board of directors of the Traffic League whose associations voted for a transportation board are: Shreveport (La.) Chamber of Commerce (3 votes), L. F. Daspit, traffic manager. Milwaukee Association of Commerce (10 votes), Frank Barry, traffic sec retary. New England Coal Dealers' Association (4 votes), W. A. Clark, Northampton, Mass., president. Waco (Tex.) Chamber of Commerce (3 votes), H. D. Driscoll, traffic manager. Utica (N. Y.) Chamber of Commerce (3 votes), John G. Duffy, secretary of transportation department. National League of Commission Merchants (2 votes), R. S. French, general manager and secretary. Merchants Exchange of St. Louis (3 votes), Charles Rippin, traffic commissioner. Baltimore Chamber of Commerce (2 votes), G. Stewart Henderson, acting traffic manager. Toledo Commerce Club (9 votes), L. G. Macomber, commissioner. Other organizations which employ traffic managers and which voted in favor of a transportation board are these: Akron (Ohio) Chamber of Commerce (10 votes), W. W. Hall, traffic com missioner. Columbus (Ohio) Chamber of Commerce (10 votes), James G. Young, traffic manager. Seattle Chamber of Commerce and Commercial Club (10 votes), S. J. Wettrick, attorney and manager of transportation bureau. In your own State of Wisconsin, Mr. Chairman, every organization which participated in the ballot voted in favor of a transportation board. I have already mentioned the Milwaukee Association of Commerce with its 10 votes The affirmative expressions also included that of the Milwaukee Chamber of Commerce (3 votes). Your home city, La Crosse, was represented by the five affirmative votes of the chamber of commerce. In addition the record shows favorable action by the Beaver Dam Merchants' and Manufacturers' Association (1 vote), Eau Claire Civic and Merchants' Association (3 votes), Green Bay Association of Commerce (3 votes), Janesville Chamber of Commerce (4 votes), Kenosha Chamber of Commerce (4 votes), Madison Association of Commerce (3 votes), Oshkosh Merchants' and Manufacturers' Association (3 votes), Rhinelander Advancement Association (1 vote), and Sheboygan Association of Commerce (2 votes), besides the Wisconsin Manufacturers' Association (2 votes), and the Wisconsin Retail Lumbermen's Association (3 votes). Not all these associations maintain traffic managers. Attached is a list of the constituent bodies in the national chamber which voted in favor of the creation of a transportation board. Enough has been said to verify abundantly President Freer's candid statement that traffic managers do not necessarily represent those who employ them, but on the contrary may and in this instance widely do advocate taking a position counter to that which is the declared attitude of their employers. The evidence could be amplified, especially by showing that traffic managers serving not bureaus but individual shipping or receiving enterprises are through the Traffice League urging upon Congress a course which the executives of those same enterprises regard as contrary to their interest. It is probably no hyperbole to say that the more efficient and useful the traffic manager is as such, the more likely he is when dealing with economic aspects of transportation to take instinctively a view the opposite to the view which his employer instinctively takes. He is appointed to see to it that week in and week out his company or the subscribers to his bureau get the most they can out of the existing railroad plant at the lowest possible rate. He has in the performance of his routine duty no necessary contact with those problems of his chief which can only be solved by a wholly different policy and by wholly different means. The traffic manager obtains carriage for the goods. The executive must look to the development of a consuming market. He must contribute to the stimulation of national prosperity. He is vitally concerned with construction of railroads into new territory for the development both of new consuming centers and new areas for production of materials. He also as a manager engaged in making both ends meet understands first hand, as the traffic manager need not and commonly does not, the same problem as it confronts the railway manager. He looks ahead. He thinks about the time when traffic will overwhelm facilities if the railroads are financially unable to provide rolling stock, track and terminals in times of moderate tonnage for the coming peak-of-load. In my testimony before your committee I took occasion to compliment the representative of the Interstate Commerce Commission who had appeared before you on his manifestation of competence for dealing with matters affecting traffic. It is a pleasure and a satisfaction to accord similar praise to President Freer. His grasp, his ability in presentation, his obvious skill in diplomacy, and his engaging candor made him a witness worthy of confidence. Before Government control certain committees of the Traffic League, in cooperation with committees of what was then the American Railway Association, laid before the Interstate Commerce Commission recommendations which that body had no hesitation in promulgating as regulations. I believe that the members of the Railway Business Association would join me in saying that in the field of. traffic problems Mr. Freer's recommendations for legislation would be regarded by them as those of an expert in whom they could safely repose confidence. The moment, however, Mr. Freer proceeded to deal with what most business men regard as the economic fundamentals, he found, as he frankly said, that he and the Traffic League were in conflict with the business view. Nowhere in all of his testimony was there the remotest approach to a recognition that there is a railway credit problem-a problem of restoring railway development. Business men recognize that there is such a problem. They propose that it be met by creating a board whose duty it shall be to ascertain the transportation needs of the country and the financial needs of the carriers and be held responsible for Government promotion of a resumption of railway improvement and construction. It would seem as if the time had come for Congress to distinguish between the competency of the Interstate Commerce Commission and of the Traffic League to give advice with regard to traffic matters and their lack of equipinent, experience, or temperament essential to wise counsel in the field of revenue, income, credit, and growth of facilities. Let me repeat the recommendation of the Railway Business Association, already laid before you, that a transportation board be created; that it have as one of its duties the issuance of a certificate prescribing the amount of revenue necessary in the public interest for each rate-making group of roads, such certificate to be conclusively binding upon the Interstate Commerce Commission, which would sanction such reasonable and nondiscriminatory rate structures as would yield the revenue prescribed; that the jurisdiction over issuance of securities should be absolute with the transportation board and likewise the control over consolidations. In other words, we suggest that the functions of the two bodies be classified as administrative and judicial. With high respect, Yours, truly, ALBA B. JOHNSON, President. Constituent bodies in the national chamber which voted in favor of the creation of a transportation board. Alabama: Birmingham Chamber of Commerce_ Arizona: Douglas Chamber of Commerce and Mines__. Arizona Merchants' Association_ Tucson Chamber of Commerce_ Blytheville Chamber of Commerce_. Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce__ El Centro (2) Chamber of Commerce_ Los Angeles (3) Chamber of Commerce_ Commercial Board of Los Angeles (Inc.). Pasadena Board of Trade Merchants' Association San Diego Chamber of Commerce_ San Jose (6) Chamber of Commerce. Whittier Chamber of Commerce_. Colorado: Denver (7) Civic and Commercial Association....... Colorado Manufacturers' & Merchants' Association. Fort Collins Commercial Club__. Pueblo Commerce Club‒‒‒‒‒‒ Connecticut: Greenwich Bureau of Business Affairs_. Bridgeport Chamber of Commerce Hartford Chamber of Commerce_. New Britain Chamber of Commerce_ New Haven (9) Chamber of Commerce__ Lumber Dealers' Association of Connecticut.. Chamber of Commerce (Inc.). Woodbury Hardware Association_ Florida: Key West Chamber of Commerce_ |