It may well be doubted, however, whether the proposed Quarles-Cooper bill
would prove any more enforcible than is the case generally with unnaturally
drastic statutes. It has been already pointed out that the Commission has no
judicial quality, so that its decisions would always have to be enforced by the
judicial tribunals. The procedure would therefore be as slow and complicated
as at present.
The proposed act would probably not be held to confer affirmative power to
establish rates for the future. Its provision in that regard does not purport
in express terms to confer any new power upon the Commission. It is that any
order " declaring any existing rate or rates * * * or any regulation or
l)ractice affecting such rates or facilities afforded in connection therewith to be
unjustly discriminative or unreasonable, and declaring what rate or rates, reg-
ulation, or practice affecting such rate or rates would be just and reasonable,
and requiring them to be substituted therefor, shall become operative and be
observed by. the parties against whom the same shall be made within thirty days
after notice, * * * but such order may at tny time be modified, suspended, or
revoked by the Commission upon full hearing of all parties in interest."

It will be observed that this section does not state that orders so made by the
Commission shall be operative " tor the future." The bills as originally drawn
contained these words, but their authors had them stricken out, apparently fear-
ing that they would make the act subject to doubts as to its constitutionality.
