The state herald., 1898-10-28
COURT DECISIONS.
CORPORATIONS MEET DEFEAT.
United states Supreme Court smashes tho
rramo Pool snd tho Illinois Supreme
Court Decides Against tho Pullman
COMPANY.

Company.
Washington, Oct. 24.-The United
States Supreme court to-day decided
the Joint Traffic Association railroad
case In favor of the United States and
against the railroads.
The case was considered one of the
most important that has ever come
from the Supreme Court, not only 10
the railroads, but to the general pubic,
and because OF the vast railroad prop
critics represented by the traffic asso-
ciation.
The association was formed Noyem-
Der 10, 1905, by thirty-One railroads
representing the great trunk lines and
their network Of branches. The pur-
pose OF the association, rs stated Ill
the articles of agreement, was ito es-
tabllsh and maintain reasonable and
just rates, fares and regulations on
state and interstate traffic.
A similar association, Oh similar
scale was formed among southwestern
roads, known as the Transmiss0uri As
ISOLATION.
These associations were soon attack
ed in the courts OH the ground that
they were In violation of the Sherman
antitrust law and also of the inter
commerce law. The TransmissOuri
first reached the United States Su-
preme Court, where In n notable opin-
ion, the court held that the association
was Illegal, being in effect, II combina-
tion In restraint OF trade and COM
merce and therefore violative of the
antitrust law.
This opinion was by divided bench,
the division being close, viz: Chief JUS
tice Fuller and Justices Harlan. Brew
or, Brown and Peckham holding the
traffic association illegal, while JUS
tices Field, Gray, Shiras and White
filed dissenting opinion upholding
the association. Soon after this decis-
ion, Justice Field gave place to Justice
Mckenna.
Although the Missouri case was con-
sidered somewhat of test, yet the
Joint Traffic Association prepared to
make n stubborn contest In support of
its existence. The case against 1t was
begun January I, 1896. in the United
States Circuit Court for the southern
district OF New York, the United
States being complainant and the at-
t0rney general directing its course
In the lower courts, the Circuit Court
disInissing the bill. and the Court Of
Appeals affirming the dismissal. The
government appealed to the United
States Supreme court.
An exceptionally brilliant array OF
counsel appeared for the association
and several railroads. including ex-
Senator Edmunds. James G. Carter
and Il. ]. Phelps. solicitor General
richards filed the brief for the gov
ernment. The main contention Of the
government was that the traffic agree
ment is a combination to prevent COM
petition, thus constituting contract
In restraint OF trade or commerce.
The answer Of the association mnin-
tanned the legality OF the agreement
on the ground that the vast needs OF
commerce require joint action and
that such action lnsur2s uniform and
Just rates and prevents secret and
unjust discrimination.
Justice Peckham announced the de-
cision. He said that the court could
distinguish no difference between this
and that of the Transmissouri case de-
cided one year ago. which was de-
cided against the railroads. He said
the only new point involved WIS as
to the consiitutionality of the anti
trust act.
The court had reached the conclu-
sion thnt Ms railroad corporations per-
formed duties of II semI-public charac-
ter. II was within the constitutional
power Of Congress TO regulate them
as provided by the antitrust net. The
only question was MS to the policy Of
Congress In adopting such measure
and ms TO questions OF policy. the
court, he said. had nothing TO do.
The opinion. which was brief. was
concurred In by Chief Justice Fuller
and Justices Harlan. Brewer. Brown
and Pcckhnm. Three Justices dis
scnted. namely, Justices Gray, Shiras
and White. Justice McKenna took no
part In the ease. as the prosecution OF
the Joint Traffic Association was he
gun while he was attorney general.
| After Justice Peckham had an
nounccd the opinion. Justice Harlan
verbally expressed with some evidence
Of satisfaction his concurrence on the
same ground. he said. ms that set forth
| In the TransmIssouri case.
Under the decision to-day the dccis.
Ions OF the United States Circuit Court
FOR The Southern district of New York,
and OF the United States Court OF Ap.
penls. both Of which were favorable
to the Joint Traffic Association. are re.
versed.
Chicago. Oct. 2i.-Thc Supreme
Court Of Illinois decided to-day that
the notion instituted by ex-Atiorncy
General Maurice +. Moloney during
.a( afll IN. IN
man Palace Car Company To restrict
It's operations To charter limitations
should stand, nnd rcmnndcd the cas.
TO the Circuit Court Of Cook county.
where II viii now he tried.
Ex-Attorncy General Moioney Ind
contended that the Pullman Company
was Incorporated simply FOR The pur.
pose OF making. selling nnl lcnsluv
rnilrond md street ears
Ills object was to compel the com.
pnny TO retire from the real estnte
rns. water, heating. brickmaking and
other enterprises conducted by n nj
the town OF Pullman and In Chicago.
The cnsc WIS fought 10y counsel for
the company and was thrown out by
the Circuit Court. Counsel for the
state demurrcd and nn appeal was
tnkrn TO III. Supreme Court, which
was decided In favor of the former NJ.
torncy general.
Among the properties pnllmnn's
Palace Car Company is charged with
holding and using In violation OF its
chnrier rights nr. the following:
III" Pullman block. on Michigan nv.
"nnc: the town of Pullman. Including
buildings, which nrc rented mud FUR.
ni-h home. To i.'"oo people; MI the