INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION.
WASHINGTON, D.C., December 1, 1896. To the Senate and House of Representatives: The Interstate Commerce Commission submits for the consideration of Congress this its tenth annual report. Among the noteworthy incidents of the current year, we assign the most prominent place to decisions of the Federal courts in cases involving important features of the “Act to regulate commerce.” The Commission created by that act is mainly an administrative body, possessing no independent power for the enforcement of its determinations. If its official requirements in any case are disregarded, they must remain without force or effect, save such immaterial effect as may result from the announcement of its conclusions, or the courts must be resorted to for the purpose of compelling compliance by an appropriate judgment. This is the theory upon which the law was framed, and no other means are provided for dealing with disobedience to regulating orders. In the earlier history of the Commission little effort was made to secure by this method the observance of directions not voluntarily acquiesced in by the carriers affected. While in a few instances the original complainants before the Commission sought in the courts the enforcement of rulings in their favor, it was not at first thought expedient for the Commission itself to institute legal proceedings to compel obedience to its decisions. The general reason for entertaining this view appears in the following extract from the fifth annual report: It was believed by the Commission that a law affecting interests of such magnitude as those involved in the business of railway transportation would not be best administered and executed by such hasty action as would necessarily invite and provoke hurtful opposition and antagonisms; and it was thought both prudent and just that such reasonable time should be given for adjustment to new conditions as might enable the carriers to so modify their classifications, schedules, and methods as to promote their own and the public interests while complying with the law. Moreover, it was soon discovered that any attempt to compel compliance with disregarded requirements would be seriously embarrassed, o