"Chairman."
It will be observed by an examination of this communication from the commission that it deemed it unwise to recommend the adoption of the amendment to the sixth section as offered in Senate bill 423, but the letter refers to its former report as expressive of its views upon this subject, which recommended a somewhat similar provision, but differing in this respect. In Senate bill 423 the filing of a protest would suspend the taking effect of the rate until after full hearing as to the merits of the advance. The recommendation of the commission in its former report, referred to in the communication, recommended the adoption of a provision that would confer upon the commission, upon the filing of a complaint, the discretion to suspend the rate until final hearing. The amendment to the bill before your committee offered during its consideration, and which has been fully discussed in this report, was in substance the recommendation of the commission.
An analysis of the letter of the chairman of the commission, stating the objections to the enactments of the proposed amendment into law, sustains many of the reasons which have been urged in this report against the approval of the principle announced by that amendment. The committee quotes from the letter, as follows:
"(a) To give to the protest of a single shipper the effect of preventing the advance of any rate until the reasonableness of that advance was affirmatively determined by the commission, would establish a hard and fast rule of doubtful fairness to the railroads and questionable advantage to the public.
"(b) Under existing conditions we are of the opinion that it would be unwise to adopt the arbitrary limitation which this bill proposes.
"(c) If every proposed advance had to be investigated by the commission and officially sanctioned before it could take effect the number of cases to be considered would presumably be so great as to render this prompt disposition almost impossible.
"(d) It is further to be observed that the passage of such a bill at this time would impose a burden upon the commission, which it should not be asked to undertake.
"(e) In instances of justifiable increase all necessary delay resulting from probable volume of cases would work injustice to the carriers.
"(f) Until conditions become more stable and the substantive operations of the act are more completely observed in railway tariffs and practices, we entertain the belief that a wider latitude of discretion on the part of carriers than this measure allows would be permitted.
"(g) It is also suggested that the practical effect of a proposed amendment might be to prevent voluntary reductions of rates by the carriers.