Crawford avalanche. (Grayling, Mich.) 1879-19??, 1895-09-12
HELPS THE SEABOARD.
Decision by the Supreme Court OF
Georgia Favors This Famous Line.


Georgia Favors This Famous Line.
In the suit of the Seaboard Air Line
Railroad against the Western and At
lantic and the Nashville, Chattanooga and
st. Louis railroads, decision was hand
ed down In the Supreme Court of Georgia
at Atlanta which is decidedly in favor of
the Seaboard Air Line, and gives this
noted litigation new turn. This litiga-
ton was caused by the boycott which the
Southern Railway and Steamship Asso-
citation declared against the Seaboard Air
Line, causing all the associated roads to
refuse to allow the Seaboard prorating
privileges on through shipments. There
had been contract made between the
Seaboard and the Western and Atlantic
and Nashville, Chattanooga and st. Louis
railroads which guaranteed the Seaboard
as advantageous rates as they should give
to other connecting lines. The Seaboard
therefore brought suit against those roads
to enjoin them from entering the boycott
ordered by the Southern Railway and
Steamship Association.
The injunction was temporarily grant
ed, but subsequently Judge Lumpkin
ruled that the Western and Atlantic and
the Nashville, Chattanooga and st. Louis
had a perfect right to enter the boycott
in so far as through business was con-
cerned, but on local business originating
on the Western and Atlantic or destined
to points on the road the defendants
could not refuse to grant all concessions
to the Seaboard allowed the other con-
Meeting lines The cnse was appealed by
the Seaboard Air Line TO the Supreme
Court, and the latter filed its opinion last
Saturday. The decision in brief is as fol-
lows:
'Where, upon a valuable consideration,
a railway company contracted with a
railroad company to Interchange busi-
ness, both through and local, with the
latter and its connecting lines for speci-
fed term of years upon terms as favor
able and advantageous to said road and les
connecting lines as those given to any
other railroad entering designated city,
the railway company was bound by the
terms of this contract, not only as to
freight shipped from or to points upon
its own line, but also as to freights de-
stined to or coming from points beyond
the same; and. therefore, could not, so
long as it pursued different and more
favorable course as TO other railroads en-
tering the city in question, lawfully do
anything TO deprive the railroad company
with which it had contracted, and it's con-
nections, of the benefits of through rates
and through proportions of rates and bills
of lading founded thereupon' as TO
freights of the latter class.
"Under this contract, therefore, it was
not, in view of the facts as found by the
trial judge, lawful for the railway CON-
pany, during the period therein stipulated,
to voluntarily enter into contracts or
maintain business relations with trans
portation companies beyond its own line,
with the intention or purpose of depriving
the other party to the contract (the rail
road company of the benefits above in
dicated; nor with such intention or pur-
pose, to refuse to receive from such trans
portation companies shipments of freight
routed over the railroad company's line
upon bills of lading giving to it the benefit
of through rates and through proportion
Of rates upon such shipments"