The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1898-09-23

The eject Of that stipulation and the conces-
sions was to suspend the operation Of the law
and to suspend the decision made by Judge
| Foster until the case should be reached In the
| supreme court Of the United States. Why did
| the attorney general see at to stipulatc in the
cases that there was no cousion between
| the stockholders OF the stock Yards company
and the company itself and thus waive ono ~
the strongest defens IS which he hadY why
did the attorney general permit the cases to
be taken away from Judge Foster. who had de-
ctded every point UP to that time In favor OF
the statei Why was he anxious that the law
be not enforced and the stock yards company
have rights and privileges which the courts
could not have granted without his consent?
No explanation can Justify his action, and the
losses of the stock shippers incurred thereby
are rretrevabe
II is also provided in the stipulation that
after an appeal is taken 10 the supreme court the
case shall be speedily advanced on the appica-
ton Of either party The stock yards company,
OF course has no desire To have the ease nd-
vauced in its present situation, and for some
reason the attorney general does not desire to
have an early hearing Of the case or the order
suspending the operation Of the law vacated. or
ne would have taken some steps to secure the
advancement Of the case. as IL is now nearly "a
year since the decision was rendered In the
lower court There is no reason why he should
not have had the case ready for hearing at this
time instead OF allowing it to 20 over the PRES
ent term OF the the court SO that It cannot 10
docketed until the October 1899 term.
The attorney general cannot escape any
responsibility for the consequence of his act
by laying II upon associate attorneys as u will
be noticed that this stipulation was signed by
himself alone Of the attorneys appearing for
the state This stipulation and his concessions
are the only things which stood between the
stock shipper and the absolute enforcement of
this law so long as the corporation was trans
acting business In the state Of Kansas after
october 1871 on account OF the stipulation
and concessions the stock yards company has
been able to charge what II pleased and has
given no other or different receipts for the
charges made by II than such as were given
before the law took effect. 1t Is true that the
stock yards company has made a small reduce
ton in It's charges for feed, but such re-
auction was not made because OF any action
taken under the luw.. 10 Is not in harmony
with the law. II was not made at the request
OF or after conference with any state officials OF
the state of Kansas The stock yard S compa-
MES OF 81 Louis. Kansas City Omaha and ST.
Joseph compete 70 greater or less extent for
business and when one OF these companies
makes cut in It's charges the other companies
are compelled to do likewise, and the cut in
charges for feed was made because Of a SINH
lar reduction In the charges made elsewhere
within competing territory and the Ennsas
statute and the Kansas officers had absolutely
nothing to do with it and are entitled to no
credit therefor
THE LAW NOT PARTISAN
me populist party cannot claim that this
law Is partisan one purely Every member
u the house Of representatives voted for it
with one exception. a number Of the repub-
icans OF the senate voted for the law and a
number Of the populSts OF the senate voted
against the law. The operation Of the law was
upheld by republican judge who is not only
strongly attached to the republican party, but
also belongs to that class known as gold
bugs" and If Judge Fosters decision had been
allowed TO take It's natural course the law
would have been inforced IN Kansas and the
people OF this state would have been enjoying
its bene fits
1t may be claimed that the state OF Missouri
will pass Legislation which will drive the stock
yards company back into the state of Kansas
to do business This cannot be expected, as
I he large cities OF St Louis, St Joseph and
Kansas City each have stock yards interests
ana the representatives OF those cities will be
able 70 control legislation in that state Be-
SIDES, law which would have the effect OF
again compelling the Kansas City Stock Yards
company TO move its business back into KAN
sas would have TO be more stringent In its
terms than the Kansas law a thing which cam
not be expected.
The populist party by Its platform Of 1899 has
admitted that this law is a failure. The KAN
sas stock shipper who shall 20 to Kansas CITY
with claim for few dollars over charges and
demand payment Of the same from the stock
yards company after It shall have been de-
leated in the supreme court Of the United
states. II such is the decision Of that court will
be met with the claim that the company has
been at all times doing business in Missouri
He will also find that the company is now en-
ur"ly out OF the state Of Kansas. and that it
cannot be sued in the state OF Kansas
lie Will also find that soon after the final de-
cree was entered and the bond given In pursue
bnce thereof, the Kansas City Stock Yards
company OF Missouri was Incorporated under
M ln lfut 90 I'd ltt..
that date the defendant the Kansas City Stock
Yards company Of Kansas, which gave the
bond ostensibly for his benefit has not yet
yarded or fed anv Of the live stock yarded and
led at Kansas City, and that the bond Is not
liable for what the Missouri corporation has
hone. EDWIN A. AUSTIN.
Topeka, Kan, Sept 2 1898