. I do not intend to go into
the details of these decisions, the last one being the decision in
the case which held that the Commission had no power to fix a future
rate, because the act did not give it that express power. My own
judgment is, and was at the time, that the original act by implication
did give to the Interstate Commerce Commission the power to say
after complaint and hearing, and after a given rate had been declared
to be unreasonable, what in that case would be a reasonable rate;
but the courts decided otherwise. Immediately, I drew up and
introduced a bill, number 1439, of the Fifty-sixth Congress, and
had it referred to the Committee on Interstate Commerce. This bill
contained provisions substantially the same as were contained in
the Hepburn Bill which passed the Senate in 1906. And in addition
it was designed to give effect to the provisions of the original
act which had been nullified by judicial construction. I worked
my hardest to secure a favorable report of this bill. We had many
hearings; but the Committee on Interstate Commerce, far from being
in favor of favorably reporting the bill, were inclined to decline
to allow me to report it to the Senate at all. I insisted that I
would report it even though adversely, which I was finally permitted
to do. But when reported to the Senate I stated that I reported
it adversely because a majority of the committee were against it,
but that I favored the bill personally, and would do what I could
to secure its passage. This was in the year 1899.

It was not until seven years later that public sentiment was aroused
to such an extent that it was possible to secure the amendments to
the Act of 1887 which were embodied in Senate bill 1439.

I think it is only justice to myself to say--and I say it with much
regret--that there were two reasons why it was impossible to secure
at that time the report and passage of Senate bill 1439. First of
all, the Executive did not manifest any special interest in securing
additional railroad regulation. Secondly, the railroads themselves
had been very active in securing a change of the personnel of the
Committee on Interstate Commerce, and men had been elected to the
Senate and placed on that committee whose sympathies were in favor
of very conservative regulation, if any regulation at all. The
railroads had firmly determined to stop any further railroad
regulation. And finally, in the make-up of the Committee,