Summary

Portrait of John Marshall Harlan II John Marshall Harlan II,  Wisconsin v. Federal Power Commission…

“ We recognize the unusual difficulties inherent in regulating the price of a commodity such as natural gas. [17] We respect the Commission's considered judgment, backed by sound and persuasive reasoning, that the individual company cost-of-service method is not a feasible or suitable one for regulating the rates of independent producers. We share the Commission's hopes that the area approach may prove to be the ultimate solution. ”
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Marshall Harlan II John Marshall Harlan II,  Wisconsin v. Federal Power Commission…

“ It is true that the Commission has announced prospectively that it would not accept for filing contracts containing such clauses, [12] but it would have been quite a different matter for the Commission to have declared that past rate increases were ineffective simply because they were based on spiral provisions. The effect of a contract clause of this type, of course, is only to permit the producer to resort to the filing provisions of § 4 (d) of the Act. If the increase is challenged, the producer must still establish its lawfulness wholly apart from the terms of the contract. ”
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature