The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1896-08-19

Carolina that q railroad is a public
highway and must be guarded and pre-
tected. This same Seaboard road haG
asked that rates on fertilizers be eL
ioined as too low and the cour :
granted it. While the 33 1-3 cut RAJ
was in operation, the long and short
haul rule was openly violated. When
the Seaboard made the cut this clause
was violated but were given rates to
Atlanta without altering rates at i'm
tervening points. He quoted the of
fetal reports of railways of the United
States to show it required 69.97 per
cent of receipts of roads TO pay oper-
ating expenses. He quoted authorities
to show that while railroads could not
go unrestricted merchants could cut
and slash and do about as they pleased.
Mr.. Smythe closed his argument by
showing that equity could give more
adequate relief than any other in such
a case.
Alex. C. King, of Atlanta, attorney
for the Seaboard, closed the argument.
His points were as follows: The sole
question before the court is, has it
jurisdiction in this case and can grant
it, only if the plaintiff, Averill, is enti-
tied to it. That the jurisdiction Of the
court depends primarily upon the ex-
istence of Federal question; in addi-
ton to this it must be q question of
such a character as gives jurisdiction
to court of equity. If the controver-
sy is based on question OF mere gen.
eral equity the parties on each side
being citizens of some State, the court
is without jurisdiction. In addition
too the court should have all necessary
parties before it. In this case certain
necessary parties are not before the
court. There is no Federal question
presented, the Federal jurisdiction is
claimed to rest on an invasion of sec
tions 2, 3 and 4, act to regulate com
merce. None OF these sections have
been violated The burden is on plGin-
tiff to submit evidence that the Sea-
bord Airline has violated the inter
State Commerce act. The question of
conspiracy brought in for the first
time by unsworn amendment to an
swer was not considered by court, it
granted Injunction and therefore af-
fords no ground for perpetuation and
the original complaint was misleading
The general charge of conspiracy al
leges no Federal question. The court
has on general jurisdiction in suits be-
tweem citizens of same States to en-
join conspiracies, but can only enioin
when conspiracy is alleged to violate
laws of the United States. The court
has no authority to enjoin conspiracy
because one may exist. If proceeding
is claimed to have been brought to
enforce the anti-monopoly act of 1890,
it must be in name of the United States
by direction Of the Attorney-General.
The conspiracy charged by Averill is
conspiracy to injure the Southern
Railway and not the Port Royal and
Augusta. The undisputed allegations
before the courts disprove anl con
spiracy ON the part Of the Seaboard
The facts alleged show no legal
damage to Averill. If any conspiracy
exists it is on the part of ATerill and
associate members of the Southern
Freight Association to prevent the
Seaboard operating its road The
only question left is the power of al
railroad to reduce it's rates subject 10
the regulations and control of the
court. 1t is not a common law and not
under the act to regulate commerce.
At the close Of Mr. Kings argument
the judge took the papers in the case
and will reserve his decision.
De "a