Audubon Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Iowa) 1894-1925, 1898-10-27
AGAINST RAILROADS.
SUPREME COURTS DECISION IN TIE
JOINT TRAFFIC CASE.

Justice Peckham Announces the Decis
ion, Which is Concurred In by Fiy,
Justices, With Three Dissenting-Cour
Decides In Favor Live Stock Exchange
WASHINGTON, Oct. 24.-The United
States supreme court has decided the
Joint Traffic association railroad case il
faver of the United States and against
the railroads.
The case is considered one of the most
important that has ever come before the
supreme court, not only to the railroads
but to the general public, because of the
vast railroad properties represented by
the traffic association. The association
was formed on Nov. 10, 1895, by 81 rail.
ways, representing the great trunk lines
and their network of branches. The
purpose OF the association, as stated in
the articles of agreement, was "to es-
tabllsh and maintain reasonable and
just rates, fares and regulations on state
and interstate traffic" A similar asso-
citation. ON smaller scale, was formed
among southwestern roads, known as
:. VIC II.
These associations were soon attacked
in the courts on the ground that they
We're IN violation of the Sherman anti
trust law and also of the interstate COM
merce law. The Transmissouri first
reached the United States supreme
court, where, in notable opinion, the
court held that the association was il.
legal, being in effect combination in
restraint OF trade and commerce and in
violation of the antitrust law Although
the Missouri case was considered some
what OF test, yet the Joint Traffic asso-
citation prepared to make a stubborn
contest i'll support Of it's existence. The
case against it was begun on Jan. Z,
1896, in the United States circuit court
for the southern district of New York,
the United States being complainant
and the attorney general directing its
course. The case went against the
government in the lower courts, the cir
cult court dismissing the bill and the
court Of appeals affirming the dismissal.
The government appealed to the United
States supreme court.
Justice Peckham announced the de-
cision. He said the court could distin-
guished no difference between this and
that of the Transmissouri case, decided
a year ago. which was decided against
the railroads. He said the only new
point involved was as to the constitu-
tionallty of the antitrust act. The court
had reached the conclusion that as rail-
road corporations performed duties of
semipublic character, it was within the
constitutional power of congress to reg
ulate them as provided by the antitrust
act.
The opinion, which was very brief,
was concurred in by Chief Justice
Fuller and Justices Harlan, Brewer,
Brown and Peckham. Three justices
dissented, namely, Gray, Shiras and
White. Justice McKenna took no part
in the case, as the prosecution of the
Joint Traffic association was begun
while he was attorney general. After
Justice Peckham had announced the
opinion, Justice Harlan verbally ex-
pressed, with some evidence of satisfac-
ton, his concurrence ON the same
ground, he said, as that set forth in the
Transmissouri case.
Under the decision today, the deci-
sions of the United States circuit court
for the Southern district of New York
and of the United States court of ap.
peals, both of which were favorable to
the Joint Traffic association, are re-
versed.
Justice Peclham also announced the
courts opinion in cases against the
Kansas City Live Stock Exchange. The
government prosecuted under the anti
trust law The supreme court holds
that the combination does not come
under the antitrust law. Justice Har-
Ian in dissenting opinion declared
that such combinations were rings or
syndicates which, if extended to oil,
sugar, salt, lumber and other staples
would place the commerce of the coun-
try under the control of a few rings
and syndicates.
Pana Strikers COufidant