Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1898-10-25
THE JOINT TRAFFIC ASSOCIATION
Declared by the United States Supreme
Court to be a Trust and an Illegal Com
binatiOn.

OccAAreu Oy the united States supreme
Court to be Trust and AN Illegal Conn
binatiOn.
Washington, October 24-The United
States Supreme Court to-day decided
the Joint Traffic Association Railway
case in favor of the United States and
against the railroads.
The case is considered one of the
most important that has ever come be-
fore the Supreme Court, not only to the
railroads but to the general public and
because OF the vast railway properties
represented by the traffic association.
The association was formed November
10, 1895, by thirty-one railways repre-
senting the great trunk lines and their
network of branches. The purpose Of
the association. as stated in the arti-
Giles OF agreement, was ito establish
and maintain reasonable and just
rates, fares, rules and regulations on
State and Interstate traffic" A SINH
lar association ON a smaller scale was
established among southwestern roads,
known as the Trans-Missouri Asso-
citation.
These associations were soon at
tackled in the courts on the ground
that they We're in violation of the
Sherman antitrust law and also of the
Interstate commerce law.
The Trans-Missouri first reached the
United States Supreme Court. where. in
notable opinion, the court held that
the association was illegal, being in eff
feet combination In restraint of trade
and commerce. and therefore violative
OF the antitrust law. This opinion
was by divided bench, the division
being very close, viz: Chief Justice
Fuller and Justices Harlan. Brewer,
Brown and Peckham holding the Traf-
fie Association illegal, while Justices
Field, Gray, Shiras and White filed a
dissenting opinion UNFOLDING the as
socation. Soon after this decision JUS
tice Field gave place to Justice Nc
Kenna
Although the Missouri case was con-
sidered somewhat Of a test, yet the
Joint Traffic Association prepared to
make a stubborn contest in support of
its existence. The case against it was
begun on January Z, 1896. in the
United States District 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
Circuit Court dismissing the bill and
the Court of Appeals affirming the dis
missal. The government appealed to-
the United States Supreme Court. An
exceptionally brilliant array of coun-
sci appeared for the association. in
Guiding ex-senator Edmunds James
c. Carter and E. J. Phelps Solicitor
General Richards filed the brief for the
government.
The main contention of the govern
ment was that the traffic agreement is
a combination to prevent competition,
-tfasss 5r trad5 Or X fS6ni n = TIE
answer of the association maintained
the legality of the agreement on the
grounu that the vast needs Of com
merce require joint action and that
such action insures uniform and just
rates and prevents secret and unjust
determinations.
Justice Peckkam announced the de-
cision. He said that the court could
distinguish no difference between
this case and the Trans-Missouri case
decided a year ago, which was decided
against the railroads. He said the on
ly new point involved was as to the
constitutionality of the antitrust act.
The court had reached the conclusion
that as railroad corporations perform
ed duties of a semi-public character
it was within the constitutional power
of Congress to regulate them as pro-
vided by the antitrust act. The only
question then was as to the policy Of
Congress in adopting such a measure.
and as to questions Of policy the court
he said had nothing to do
The opinion, which was very brief.
was concurred in by Chief Justice Full
Ter and Justices Harlan, Brewer, Brown
and Peckham. Three justices dissent
ed, namely. Justice 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 Packham had announced the
opinion Justice Harlan verbally ex-
pressed with some evidence of salts
faction his concurrence, on the same
ground he said, as that set forth in
the Trans-Missouri case.
Under the decision to-day the de-
cisions Of the U. S. circuit court for
the southern district OF New YORK and
of the U. S. court of appeals, both of
which were favorable to the joint traf-
flc association are recovered
Justice Peckham also announced the
courts opinion in cases against the
Kansas City Live Stock Exchange,
operating at Kansas City and Western
Missouri. The government prosecut-
ed under the antitrust law The SUI
preme court holds that the association
does not come under the antitrust
law. Justice Harlan in a dissenting
opinion declared that such combina-
tons were rings or syndicates which
if extended to oil, sugar, salt, lumber
and other staples, would place the
commerce Of the country under the con-
troll of few rings and syndicates.
LAST OE HIS RACE