Custer weekly chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, S.D.) 1890-1931, 1898-01-29
MAXIMUM RATE CASE
DECISION EXPECTED
As the Supreme Court Stood the
Decision Would Be Against
the State.
1T DEPENDS ON THE NEW MEMBER
If McKenna Should Happen TO Up.
hold the Nebraska Law the
Court Would BE Evenly
Divided.

Washington, Jan. 22.-There is ev-
cry reason to believe that an opinion is
now actually being written in the Ne
braska maximum rate case, which has
been before the supreme court for a
couple Of years. AS nearly as can be
discovered, the opinion is adverse TO
the state, and declares that the law
fixing the maximum rates is unconsti-
%tutional, because it deprives the stock
holders of the railroads of their prop
erty without due process Of law, and
is an attempt to fix rates upon inter.
state commerce, which is the prerog-
ative Of the federal government.
The understanding about h court
is that the opinion will not be handed
down until the new justice takes his
seat, and possibly not until just before
the adjournment of the court in the
spring. The decision has been anX-
iously awaited by Wall street and rail-
Grad authorities all over the country,
for if the Nebraska authorities should
be sustained each state would have the
right 10 fix the maximum rates within
its own territory, no matter where the
freight originated. The Nebraska law
was passed in April, 1898, and it pro-
vided an arbitrary classification of
freight and fixed rates as the maxi
mum to be charged for each class be-
tween all points in the state OF Ne
braSka.
The law provides a penalty Of $1,000
for the first offense, and thereafter up
to as high as $4,000 for each violation.
Under the provisions Of the law At
torney General Churchill. Secretary of
CtnH, D;,a. n'raog,,r.. nnrtlnNE Allli-
tor Moore and Public Land Commits
sioner Russell, composing the state
board Of transportation, undertook
10 regulate the railroads. The Union
Pacific filed a bill in equity in the
United States court, in which it was
charged that the law was unconstitu-
tional and void, the rates unreasonable
and confscatory, and that the railroad
companies were deprived of the equal
protection OF the laws, while the act
itself was charged to be repugnant to
the constitution of the United States,
because it attempted to regulate i'm
tcrstate commerce.
In November, 1894, the United States
court, which was presided over by JUS
tice Brewer of the supreme court, en-
tered n decree enjoining the railroad
companies from publishing a rate
schedule i'm accordance with the law.
or obeying or in any way conforming
10 the provisions of the Nebraska act.
The board of transportation was en-,
joined from hearing any complaints
against q railroad company, and the
attorney general Of the state was for
hidden TO bring any injunction, man
damus or civil action against the road,
on account of this law.
The decree declared that the Ne
braSka law was repugnant TO the con-
stitution of the United States because
by it the railroad companies could not
exact for the transportation Of freight
from one point to another charges
which would yield to them a reason
able compensation for their services.
The case was argued before the su-
preme court in March, 1896, and rear
gued last April, when William j. Bry-
an appeared as one of the attorneys
for the state. IL is understood a de-
cision was reached by a full court of
nine justices and by a vote of 5 TO 4.
At that time, however, Justice Field
had already sen in his resignation,
and it was therefore deemed best to
hold the former decision until the new
justice had had an opportunity to join
in it. If Justice McKenna should
chance to uphold the law it would re-
suit in a divided court.