Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-05-17
THE B. & 0. ON TOP.
A Supreme Court Decision of Great
Importance to Travellers
RLILROADTICKETSBY WHOLESALE
Nay Be Legally Sold at Lower Rates Than
When They Are Retailed.
SOME OTHER IMPORTANT FINDINGS

HereQ by the OnlleO SVdleS supreme SOuFI
-o-day in the case commonly known as the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad theatrical
rate case," involving the rights of the rail-
Dad company to sell at a reduced rate
tickets to parties of ten or more persons
The court, in an opinion by Justice Brown,
sustained the decision of Judge jackson,
refusing to issue an injunction to restrain
he railroad company from continuing the
.ale of party-rate tickets.
The general ground of the opinion is that
It is not an unjust discrimination for rail-
road company to sell tickets at wholesale
cheaper than at retail. The case originated
in a complaint made by the Pittsburg, Gin
cinnati and st. Louis Railroad Company
against the Baltimore and Ohio, to the
Interstate Commerce Commission. The
charge against the Baltimore and Ohio was
that it had violated the Interstate CON-
merce act, first, by failure to post in its
offices excursion rates, the Baltimore and
Ohio Railroad Company insisting that the
advertisement in the newspapers was all
that was required, and second, by the sale
of party rate tickets, whereby parties of 10
or more persons travelling together on one
ticket, were transported over its lines at
single passenger being about three cents per
mile.
Not Considered Discrimination.
The second allegation, which is the one of
substantial Importance, the commission de-
cided against the Baltimore and Ohio Rail
road Company, and when it continued, in
disregard of the commissions order to sell
party rate tickets, applied to the United
States Court for the Southern district of
Ohio for the issuance of writ of injunction
or other process to restrain the Baltimore
and Ohio from further continuing to sell
these tickets. When Judge Jackson de-
cided against the commission il brought the
case to the United States Supreme Court, as
the matter was regarded as one of great i'm
portance. The Court in its opinion says:
1t is not all discrimination or preferences
that fall within the inhibition OF the statute
such only as are unjust or unreasonable.
For instance, it would be obviously unjust
to charge n greater sum than for single
trip from Washington to PittsburZ; but If A
agrees not only to go but to return by the
same route, it is no injustice to B to permit
him TO do so for reduced fare, since the
services are not alike, nor the circumstances
and conditions substantially similar as re-
quired by section to make an unjust dis
elimination. Indeed. the possibility of just
discrimination and reasonable preferences
is recognized by these sections in declaring
however, with the plaintiff, in its conten-
tion that a charge may be perfectly reason
able under section l, and yet may create un-
just discrimination or an unreasonable
preference under sections lands 8. The rail-
road companies are bound only to give the
same terms to all persons alike, under the |
same conditions and circumstances, and any |
fact which produces an inequality of condi- |
tions iustifies an inequality OF charges.
The Court therefore holds that party rate |
tickets, as sold by the Baltimore and Ohio, |
being sold to all persons in parties of ten |
or more, whether theatrical parties or not,
do not constitute violation of the inter- |
State commerce act.
Title to Valuable Lands Settled.
A decision was to-day given in the Uni |
ted States Supreme Court in favor of Mary |
Bardon in a suit between her and the North |
ern Pacific Railroad Company to determine |
title to lands in Wisconsin. The suit is
one of Importance, and involved property |
of great value. Mrs Bardon held the lands |
under pre-emption claim, and the railroad
company maintained that she held them
merely as trustee of the company. By the
admission of counsel it was conceded that
the lands Law within the place limits ofthe
Northern Pacific Railroad, and that title
would pass to it unless excepted from
the grant by facts admitted by counsel
on both sides. These facts were prior to
the grant; one James Robinson settled upon
the land as a qualified pre-emptor. This
entry was in course of compile
tion when the grant to the Northern Pacific
was made, and this took the lands out of the
public domain and prevented interest in
them passing to the company under the
granting act. The pre-emption entry of
was subsequently cancelled, and as
the cancellation took place subsequent to
the location of the road by the Northern
Pacific, the question arose, did that cancel
alton make the lands part of the public do
Min, subject to the grant to the Northern
Pacific? The Court answers this question
in the negative. Mrs Bardon's title, ac-
quired after cancellation, is therefore re-
formed, and the case reversed, with direc-
tions to dismiss the bill
A City Ordinance Found Valid.
Ernest Ammon is liquor dealer in Chi |
cago who sold wine valued at s., ,2S7 to Aut
Miller. The city of Chicago had whole
sale liquor dealers license law, and when
Miller did not paw the money and Ammon
sued him the latter had to meet a conten-
tion on the part of Miller that the same was
in violation of the city ordinance, and that
the contract was therefore void. Ammon
on his part maintained that the ordinance
was unconstitutional. and also that Miller
was liable, even if the sale did violate
valid ordinance. He won his suit in the
lower court. but the United States Supreme
Court to-day reversed that judgment, and
decided against Ammon. 1t holds that the
ordinance is valid and that the sale was an
unlawful one, and being an unlawful one,
The contract was such as the Court could not
uphold.
The Mutual Life, New York Life and
Life Insurance Companies to-
lay succeeded in securing an order from
he Supreme Court for new trial in the
somewhat celebrated Hillmon life insurance
case. This is case of alleged attempt to
swindle the insurance companies out of
large amount of money by palming off the
BODY of one man for that of smother man. on
whose life there were large policies Hill
mon had policies aggregating $4,000 on his
life, in the three companies named, and
when his death was announced, not a great
while after the issuance OF the policies, the
became suspicious of fraud and
refused to pay the amount of the policies to
SaIlie Hillmon.
The Widow Doesn't Get Her NIitr.
Death, it was asserted, resulted through
an accident at Crooked Creek, Kansas.
After the Coroner's inquest the insurance
company succeeded in having the body ex-
humed and contested the suit brought bv
Mrs. Hillmon, setting up the claim that the
body was that of a man named Walters
rhe lower court gave judgement for Mrs.
ldillmon, and this judgement was to-day
reversed on the ground of errors at the
.rIa., particularly the exclusion of certain
evidence.
The Supreme Court to-day rendered an
opinion reversing the decision of the Texas
Courts in the case OF Count Joseph Telfaner, !
appellant, versus George w. Russ Russ