New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-11-30
4 VICTORY FOR THE ROADS.
FRIGHT ASSOCIATIONS NOT TRUSTS.
,,.ocr RINER so DECIDES IN TIE SUIT
BROUGHT UNDER THE ANTITRUST La"
AGAINST TIE TRANs-NIsSoUM
ASSOCIATION.


telegram from Topeka, Kan. yes crazy "n,
nopnced decision on the day precedips by '""se
nner in the United States Circuit Court, III one oi
bo mnst important roilroad suits which nave lectY
been before the colr,s. The action was pio".n' ~
the United states Government against the ll"S
Missouri Freight Association, under The sherman -'~
ernst Act of July ., 1850 to compel the aNsoc'auon
which is composed Of sixteen railroads ana WEN, -
largely controls Traffic west Of the N7so"" h'e'' -
dlsband Tie case was decided In favor Of 'he r"A
roads IL being held by the court that the sherman
Antitrust act does not apply to theh'
The decision is a vital one to the railroad com,
panies Had it been against them ara De'h Su'''''-
by the Higher courts, all further eohc'r'eU ",'V'i
would have been imPossiblc-no general sched"e Vi
tes conld hereafter have been arranged, and there
would have been no course open except 'hSN oi
Individual competition An adverse decision "oai"
nlso the railroads hold have affected business W.
astrously The roads now left as they "eTc D0-
fore the act was passed free 10 maze co'"Dil''ol'9
and 10 form associations for the purpose OF adN"h'e
mutual interests. The outcome OF the hsh' Is l1sO
BY railroad men great victory
Tho suit was begun last spring by united STATES
District Attorney ADV acting under INSTRUCTIONS from
,,.oro, C.o,oreI Miller The railroads composing
tie rans-Mis,Our Association are the A'oihSo"'
rooeNa and Santa Fe the Missouri Kansas and Texas
the Chicago, Kansas and Nebraska the chicago hocA
Island and Pacific the Chicago, ST. Paul. Minneapolis
md Omaha the Burlington and Missouri, the Denver
and Rio Grande tie Rio Grande Western, the Denver
Texas and Fort North the Fremont, Ei1hoFh anu
Missouri Valley, the Kansas City, Fort scout anu
Memphis the st. Joseph and Council BlufS' inc
Missouri Pacific, the Sioux City and Pacific, the 81
Josenb and Grand Island, the st. Louis and san
Francisco the Union Pacific, ard the Utah Central
The object of the suit dissolve the association
and TO restrain the railroads from catering into any
similar organization for the fixing of rates.
The case was argued at Cheyenne, wyoming
ooriv in August The sherman Antitrust
net prohibits contracts, comtinations and all forms
Of trusts and consriracies which Impose restraint
uron trade and commerce among the several states or
with foreign nations, and prohibits the establishment
Of monopoles under criminal penalties ana CIVIL
remedies Tie argument that the esia0h hmeht oil
the TransMissour Freight Association was Nioia-
lion of the sherman act; that it was restraint
upon trade and an attemp, 10 monopohze the carry
Ing business west of the Missouri River, and That 1t
was surrender 10y the railroads to the association OF
tDeir powers rights and franchises. II was iur'her
argued that the public entitled to unresralheu
competition between the railroads, and that any
combinations or agreements which prevented IL were
IN violation Of the act.
The railroads contested every point. They
argued that the agreement between the
railway companies, by which the association
was established. was not violation OF the act, De-
cause the association not trust in the sense
in which the word used In the act. The WORD
trust" they urged, was used IN the ACT III
popular sense, meaning combinations for the pur-
pose of limiting supply, by which commodities are
acquired and controlled The freight association, 1t
WAS held, was OF an entirely different nature II
did not operate 10 restrain trade, and did not con
sttue a monopoly. The railway companies also
de.ied that they had surrendered their rights, POI"
ers privileges or franchises, to the association
1t was further asserted that the sherman act wa
not intended to apply and did not apply 10 common
Carriers and that common carriers were exclude
from the operation Of The because they wcI7
not mentioned III II, ana because they mad Deer
covered shortly before by the Interstate Commerce
act under which the control Of the railroads wa
given 10 a commission which had authority to dcil
with all questions of excessive charges Determinations
rebates, pools etc. The Interstate Commerce Com
mission had recognized these associations as valid
had received from them reports. and had filed the
agreements. The railroad companies also held thai
free and unlimited competition was never legal
right: and that when competition Is unreStrained II
destroying all weaker rivals, and in bringing about
monopoly.
Judge Riner sitting Topeka. Kan, gave de-
cison on Monday afternoon sustaining the contention
OF the railroads every point. he Judge held that
there WAS nothing unlawful Illegal In the contract
itself that OF the corporations composing the
association had turned over TO 1t any or their ran
Chises and that the provisions o. the cterinan Ana
Trust act do mol apply 20 common carriers There are
sixtyciglt tariff associations in this country similar
I'm character the Trans Missouri Freight Association
and 10 each Of them The decision IS % tie first I'M
por'ance The case Is necessarily ended, for II
NAV be taken by the Government 10 the United States
supreme Court or 10 Che Court OF Appeals. The
verdict. however greatly strengthens the position OF
TIE railway companies.