St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-10-18
BREWER ON RATES.
Section Four Of the Interstate
Commerce Law Inter-
preted by Him.
Rates on All Roads Not Re-
CURED to Be Uniform by
the Law.
The Long and Short Haul
Clause and It's Effect on
Joint Rates.
All Shippers We're Charged
the Same by the Defend
ant Railroad.

The United States court of appeals
was in session all of yesterday. with
Judges Caldwell. Sanborn aud Shiras
on the bench. Opinions were handed
down covering nine causes, and five
other causes were considered, OF con-
tinued. An important opinion was
handed down by the court which covers
two cases under the interstate law, and
which was written by Hon. David j.
Brewer, associate justice of the supreme
court of the United States. The matters
disposed of are as follows:
| Chicago 81 Northwestern Railway
Company, plaintiff in error, VS.. John
Osborne, and the same company against
II. A. Juned ct al. These cases involve
questions under the interstate commerce
law. They were taken up from the
United States circuit court for the
southern district of Iowa. w. c. Cloudy
represented the railroad company, and
G. {. Nourse the defendants in error,
who were the complainantS in the cuuI
below. The opinion is applied to both
cases. but was written III the former
case. The opinion was written by JUS
tice Brewer, and the court below is re-
versed. John Osborne brought suit to
recover 1925 as
Ove-cEaarges on Corn
shipped from Scranton, To-, to Chicago.
In his review of the case, Justice
Brewer gives the following information /:
which amounted to Is cents per hun
died OH corn. The rate for com from
Blair, Neb., to New York was 3S115
cents; to Boston, Philadelphia and Bal
timore the rate was higher. The rates
from Turner and Rocheile-the one
thirty and the other seventy miles west
of ChicagO-the rates were 80 cents and
2713 cents. BY agreement 3t5 cents of
this rate went to the defendant and the
Elkhorn IL Missouri Valley Railroad
company. The rate from Blair TO
Turner and Rochelle on ears shipped to
New York, Boston, Philadelphia and
Baltimore was IL cents, or lower than
the local rate of Is cents from Scranton
by the connecting lines was not pub
lished at Scranton. and Osborne had no
knowledge of the difference in rates
until he made application to
Ship Beyond Chicago.
Thereafter he shipped to Boston and
received the benefit OF the through
tariff
This Tease must he determined ex-
cluSively by the provisions OF the inter
state commerce law as originally passed.
No question was submitted to the jury,
and no evidence was offered as to
whether Is cents was, or was not a rea-
sonable rate for carrying corn from
Scranton to Chicago. The theory of
Osborne'S case was that the railroad
had violated the fourth section of the
act by charging more for short than
for long haul: and. of course, if it
had, it is liable to Osborne.
1t Is held that the business done. be-
ing OF a quasi-public nature, is subject
to governmental regulation, though
carried on by private capital,
it vas quasi public business, always
prevented the owners of capital, in
vested in it, from charging. like owners
of other property any price they saw fit.
| A reasonable compensation was all that
! they could exact; and a person ag-
| grieved could always invoke the aid of
| the courts to protect himself against it.
The burden of proving that the charge
was unreasonable lay with the person
| invoking the aid of the court; hence the
| efforts by state and nation to establish
| limits of charges and means of evidence
of easy and accurate aScertainment.
The interstate law has not attempted
to require the tariffs Oh all roads to be
uniform. nor to place limit, in figures.
beyond which
| Railroads Shall Not Charge.
The laws of business and of COMPETE
ton have been deemed sufficient re-
| StraintS in that direction. There is
nothing in the commercial act to com
| pei either company to charge the same
as its competitor for through or local
transportation. Either may reduce its
| rates. Nither road is compelled to adj
| just its local rates to suit the other, not
compellable to make a joint tariff with
| it. 1t MAY insist upon charging its local
rates for all transportation over its iiIe.
Ii the roads make joint tariff by
! agreement, such joint tariff is not the
basis by which the reasonahleness OF
the local tariff of either line is deter,
mined. Judge Brewer explains his
position by saying that he does
not intend TO intimate that
the two companies with JOINT
line can make a tariff from Turner tC
Cleveland higher than from Turner to
Buffalo. for when the two companies, by
JOINT tariff. make new and independ
ent line, the new and Independent line
may become subject to the long and
short haul clause. 1t is decided, how.
ever. that through tariff on joint
line is not the standard by which the
separate tariff of either company is tC
be:measured. In this case it is claimed
that any shipper. at Scranton or Other
points Oh defendants line further iron
Chicago than that, is
Charged less for Shipping
grain to Chicago than was the plaintiff
The jury in the court below should have
been instructed 20 find verdict for the
railroad company.
Aztec Mining Company, plaintiff in
error, VS.. John ". Ripley. Error from
the supreme court of New Mexico
Opinion by Judge 0. p. Shiras. grant
ing the motion to dismiss the writ OF
error fer want of Jurisdiction. TIL:
was an &C ton TO recover Sl.G1715 fol
goods sold. Judgment was rendered
Ill the court below for the plaintiff
Chicago d Northwestern Railway
Company. plaintiff in error. VS.. A. i
Davis. as administrator OF Olof Hoec
ling. Error from the Iowa court
Opinion by Judge Walter H. Sanborn,
reversing the Judgment below and de-
Gliding that the court below should have
instructed the jury to find for the rail
road company. The verdict gave dam
ages for the killing OF Heocing b,
being run over by dump car while
standing on the track. 1t is held tina
he was negligent in standing on the
track after getting off a hand car.
Union Pacific Railway Company VS.
Edward Jarvi. Opinion by Judge San
born affirming decision of the court be
low: Jarvi recovered verdict of S., OOO
for Injuries sustained by stone falling
upon him from the roof of a mine.
Henry Burr VS.. Carlos s. Greeley
Opinion by Judge Henry c. Caldwell
affirming the ruling of the court below
In sustaining the demurrer to the com
i. plant. This was suit for
Breach Of Warranty
in deed fol- land In Kansas. The lant
was granted to Greeley by the Unior
PacIfic railroad. The Union Pacific hat
title TO the land by patent from the gov
| eminent tO the Kansas Paoifio D.;l1,o