OF THE BOARD OF RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS, STATE OF KANSAS, FOR THE YEAR ENDING NOVEMBER 30, 1896. COMMISSIONERS: JOSEPH G. LOWE, J. M. SIMPSON, SAM'L T. HOWE. B. F. FLENNIKEN, Secretary. R. M. FULTON, Clerk. Ross B. GILLULY, Stenographer. TOPEKA. THE KANSAS STATE PRINTING COMPANY: J. K. HUDSON, State Printer. 1896. FOURTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT. Office of the Board of Railroad Commissioners, Hon. E. N. Morrill, Governor: Sir The Fourteenth Annual Report of the Board of Railroad Commissioners is here submitted. The railroad year covered by the report ends with June 30, 1896; the transactions of the Board reported are for the year ending November 30, 1896. Of matters considered by the Board during the year, two were of more than ordinary importance, and are here mentioned in the order of their occurrence: 1. The question of a change by the railroad companies in the method of charging upon shipments of live stock. 2. The question of a reduction in rates upon grain and grain products to the southern seaboard. The action of the Board in relation to these matters is set forth at length in another part of the report. There will also be found in an after part of the report such decisions of the Board upon complaints made to it during the year as were thought likely to be of public interest. Twenty-six complaints were disposed of during the year by correspondence, and without the formality of being placed. upon the Board's docket. Formal action was had in 31 cases. So far as the Board is advised, all orders made by it during the year have been observed by the railroad companies. One hundred and one cases appearing formally upon the docket are undetermined at this date, but of these 87 are involved in the question of charges upon shipments of live stock before referred to, and will be disposed of in connection with that question. In compliance with law, the Board makes elsewhere in the report such suggestions and recommendations upon matters connected with the regulation of carriers as public interest seems to demand. LEGISLATION IN AID OF RAILWAY REGULATION. Those who have carefully studied the question of railway regu lation cannot but admit that it is one of the gravest problems before the American people. To be affected for better or for worse by its solution are the material interests of citizens, and, through them, political and social conditions. It is a question that should be considered intelligently and dispassionately, with a view to its solution upon lines that will conserve the greatest possible number of involved interests. Harangues of demagogues, tirades of loquacious would-be popular leaders, and specious articles in the press, all pretending to a knowledge, which in fact is wofully lacking, present a striking contrast to opinions of some of the best minds of the age, formed after almost a lifetime spent in close study of the problem. The members of this Board do not assume to possess a knowledge which qualifies them to present with dogmatic insistence a scheme that will satisfactorily settle all grievances growing out of the present transportation system. Nevertheless, after nearly two years of patient and careful study of the questions at issue, they have arrived at certain conclusions which they consider may be properly mentioned in this report. It may be said that all past legislation upon the subject, both state and national, has been only tentative, and in the nature of things such will be the character of legislation for some time to come. The time to elapse before a reasonably perfect system of regulation shall be attained depends much upon the methods of legislation. If laws are enacted hastily or with but little consideration, the end desired will be the longer deferred. On the other hand, if legislation follows the attainment of a proper knowledge of the situation, and proceeds upon lines laid down by careful, disinterested students of the question, or by state or federal authorities upon whom has been devolved the duty of administering present laws and recommending changes therein, an orderly system will be sooner reached. Great Britain and the United States were pioneers in the building of railways, and in the absence of precedents to guide or forewarn, their laws were so framed that construction of competitive railways was freely permitted, and the principle of laissez faire-at whose doors may properly be laid the greater part of the confusion which now exists--became the controlling element in forming their systems of transportation, and these had grown to immensity before regulation was attempted. Other countries whose eras of railway construction began at later dates profited by their experience, and regulated construction and management from the start. The problem with the latter was therefore not nearly so complex as with the former. When regulation was first attempted in the United States, it was considered by the railways as an unjustifiable innovation, and was sturdily contested, but gradually the right of the states and of the federal government to regulate, within their respective spheres, transportation by railways was recognized, and now no one disputes that the right may be exercised, subject only to those constitutional limitations which guarantee protection to private ownership in property. The attitude of railway managers a few years since contrasts strongly with their position to-day. Many of them are now seeking government regulation in certain directions, in order that railways in common with the public may be enabled to avoid the disastrous results of unrestricted railway competition. If proof is wanted that legislation upon the subject is in the experimental stage, it may be found in the multifarious laws of the several states and in their varied interpretation by state courts, and also in the various constructions placed by United States courts of equal authority upon certain provisions of the federal act to regulate commerce. The difficulties to be surmounted in arriving at a judicious system of regulation are numerous, but the study and experience of the members of this Board incline them to the belief that most of these difficulties will quickly disappear when a plan insuring steady, equitable rates shall have been evolved. How complex the rate problem is, even to able men who have spent the greater part if not all of their business years in devising rates and applying them practically in the transportation of articles of commerce, will appear from the statements following, made by gentlemen of long experience in traffic matters. Mr. Albert Fink, than who there is perhaps in America no greater authority on railroad rates, was one of the witnesses examined by the United States senate select committee on interstate commerce, from whose labors resulted the federal act to regulate commerce. Mr. Fink said: "Railroad tariffs are like houses built of cards: if you remove one card the whole house falls to pieces. The intricate relations of these tariffs one upon the other is like that. They cannot be tampered with. This is well understood, and yet it is constantly done, and then results in war. For example, when some road in Chicago cuts the grain rate 1 cent, it is felt at Indianapolis. The Indianapolis roads must follow at once. So it is all over the country. Whenever there is the least deviation from the tariff anywhere it has to be followed everywhere.” Mr. George R. Blanchard, also an expert in rate matters, tesified before the same committee, as follows: "Now take this rule of dependency, which, like a falling row of |