The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-08-23
RAILROADS WIN.
Judge Mccormick of Texas Makes
an Important DECISION.
Case of the Railroads Against the Texas
Railroad Commissioning Of =
the Decision.

NEW York, Aug. pa dispatch from
Dallas, Tex, says: Judge Mccormick. at
Dallas, in decision in the case of the rail-
roads against the Texas railroad commits
si0ners, decided every point in favor of the
railroad companies and granted an injunc-
ton against the commissioners restraining
them from establishing the proposed rates.
These rates proposed by the commission
the railroads claimed would have compelled
them TO run rounds at serious loss.
The decree reviews the Texas railroa d
building and agitation leading to the adop-
JiOn of the constitutional amendment
authorizing the commission. Judge Nc
Cormick then says there is no such collu-
sion between the complaining Trust COM
panies and railroads shown as would pre-
judice the right Of the Trust companies TO
nle the bill. Moreover the Trust COM
panies show an equitable interest in fair
earnings Of railroads, actual ownership
and possession of securities Of the roads
which are being injured and threatened
with destruction by the railroad commits
sion's acts.
They show further that the railroads are
coerced by the commission and the direct
ors cannot exercise their Judgment and
discharge their duties as they should and
would but for said coercion. The court
then goes on TO show that the railroads
were built under extreme hardships, OPEN
ing up new country and having to wait 8
long time for returns; also that the char
acter of soil is such as TO render it ex-
tremely difficult to construct and maintain
sound roads, and the proper cost of plants
as the exist today exceeds the amount of
its bonded indebtedness and earnings.
These roads. says the court, have not
been diverted to improper uses, and none
of these railroads except the Gulf, Colo
RADIO and Santa Fe has paid dividends.
If do he no. nhr,ni<
to process Of reorganization under fore
closure proceedings, two OF them the sec
ond time, and the Gulf road, which has so
lar escaped this ordeal, now owns a float
ing debt of upwards Of $1,000 coo. With
1ncoRsioerate exceptions, the Judge says
the commission has reduced every tariff
which 1t has touched under commission
rates. The Texas 81 Pacific derived only
enough revenue to pay operating expenses
and cost OF repairs, and per cent. on
$1,000 per mile. This ROAD, uuder such a
triff, has over S21S, 900 in seven months.
The St. Louis & Southwestern has not
earned the necessary operating expenses,
and has been compelled to borrow money
TO meet the deficiency in operating ex-
penses and interest on mortgage obliga-
tons. The loss to the International and
Great Northern in the few months 1t has
been out Of the hands of the receiver shows
& greater ratio than two hundred thousand
per annum. The loss 10 the Gulf, Colorado
d Santa Fe from these commission tariffs
aggregate $500. 900. The question Of reason
ebleness of rates is eminently q question
for judicial Investigation.
Under the commissions rulings the
roads are deprived of the lawful use of the
property without due process of law and
In violation of the constitution OF the
United States, and in SO far as they are
deprived while other persons are permitted
20 receive profits on their invested capital,
the companies are deprived of equal pro-
lection of the law.
Pointing to the fact that the interstate
commerce commission did not possess, or
claim power 10 enforce the rates fix by
it except through the court of the
highest Jurisdiction. the court said
that this commission would not meet the
exigency OF the hour IL reasonableness of
its rates could be inquired into before being
enforced. In conclusion Judge Mccormick
says:
at clearly appears to me that every pro-
vision OF this law which tends 10 force a
compliance with the rates OF the commits
sion, that either they are reasonable or not
Is invited"
Orders were therefore issued restraining
the commission from enforcing or
trying to enforce any tariffs hereto
fore Issued or from issuing any more
tariffs and enjoining all persons, corpora
tons or individuals from suing the railroad
company under the tariff of the commission
heretofore issued or per the circular to be
issued, for any charge or penalty advising
under commission of law and enjoining the
railroad from keeping in effect tariffs here
tofore issued. or putting into effect tariffs
hereafter to be issued.
The case was appealed to the United
States supreme court