The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-10-25

washington, Oct. 24.-The United
States supreme court today 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 to the railroads, but to
the general public, and because of the
vast railroad properties represented by
the Traffic association
The association was formed on Nov
10, 1895, by 81 railways, representing
the great trunk lines and their network
of branches. The purpose of the assO-
citation, as stated in the articles or
agreement. was Ito establish and main
tain reasonable and just rates. fares
and regulations on state and interstate
traffic"
A similar association on a smaller
scale was formed among southwestern
roads, known as the Trans Missouri as
sociation. These associations were soon
attacked in the courts, on. the ground
that they were in violation of the Sher-
man antitrust law and also ~of stfre
interstate commerce law. The trans
Missouri case first reached the United
States supreme court where in a nota-
BILE opinion the court held that the as
sociGtion was illegal, being in effect a
combination in restraint of trade and
commerce and therefore violative of the
antitrust law. This opinion was by a
divided bench, the division being very
close viz: Chief Justice Fuller and
Justices Harlan, Brewer, Brown and
Peckham holding the traffic association
Illegal. while Justices Field, Gray,
Shiras and White fled a dissenting
opinion upholding the association. Soon
af IaricinU TnCffna. E'fa1d
place to Justice McKenna- Although
the trans Missouri case was considered
somewhat of a test, yet the Joint Traffic
association prepared TO make a stub
born contest in support of its existence.
HISTORY OF THE CASE.
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 COM
plainant 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 dismissal The government ap-
pealed to the United States supreme
court. An exceptionally brilliant array
of counsel appeared for the association
and several railroads. including ex-Sen-
ator Edmunds, James c. Carter and
T. J. Iutltl tlS- SOliElAOI NItlltIctl INtCAletA Us
filed the brief for the government The
main contention of the government was
that the traffic agreement is a cOmbina-
tion to prevent competition, thus con-
stituting a contract in restraint of
trade or commerce. The answer of the
association maintained the legality of
the agreement on the ground that the
vast needs of commerce require joint
action and that such action insures
uniform and just rates and prevents
secret and unjust Determinations.
PECKHAM ANNOUNCES DECISION.
Justice Peckham announced the de-
cision. He said that the court could
distinguish no difference between this
and the trans-Missouri case decided a
year ago against the railroads He said
the only new point involved was as to
the constitutionality of the trust act.
The court had reached the conclusion
that as railroad corporations performed
duty of a semi-public character, it was
within the constitutional power of con-
sress to regulate them as provided by
the antitrust act The only question
was as to the policy of congress in
adopting such a measure. As to ques-
tions of policy, the court, he said. had
nothing TO do. The opinion, which was
very brief, was concurred in by Chief
Justice Fuller and Justices Harlan,
Brewer. Brown and Peckham. Justices
Gray, Shiras and White dissented. JUS
tice 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 expressed,
with the same evidence Of satisfaction,
his concurrence on the same as set
forth in the trans Missouri case. Under
the decision today the decisions OF the
United States circuit court for the
southern district Of New York and of
the United States court of appeals both
of which were favorable TO the joint
traffic association. are reversed
Justice Peckham also announced the
courts opinion in cases against the
Kansas City Live Stock exchange. op-
Grating at Kansas City and western
Missouri The government prosecuted
under the antitrust laws. The supreme
court holds that the association does
not come under the antitrust law. Jus
tice Harlan. in dissenting opinion, de-
clared that such combinations We're
rings or syndicates which, if extended
to oil, sugar. salt. lumber and other
staples, would place the commerce of
the country in control of a few rings
and syndicates-
ISSUES INVOLVED.
In the joint traffic opinion. Justice
Peckhan gives n history of the early
stages OF the litigation and the main is
sues between the government and the
association. After pointing out the
similarity between TIE Missouri
case and the present one, the opinion
says: so far as the establishment Of
rates and fares is concerned, We do not
see any substantial differences between
this agreement and the one set forth in
the trans Missouri case. In that case
the rates were established by the
agreement, and any company violating
he schedule of rates as established un-
der the agreement was liable to pen
atty. a company could withdraw from
the association by giving 80 days no
tice. but while it continued member 1t
was bound to charge the rates fixed
under a penalty for not doing so. In this