The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-02-25
CASE is SUBMITTED
ARGUMENT or THE LONE STARS
INJUNCTION ENDED.
thorities cited before RENDER
Ing n Decision.

| Galveston, Texas, February 2i.-'The
| fate of tho Lone Star line in its applica-
ton for an injunction against the railroads
| is now in tho hands of Judge Bryant Ar
| gument was concluded at noon today, and
as soon as the numerous cases and author
| tiles cited can DO examined q decision will
be announced. If the temporary restrain
| ing order be dissolved aud the prayer for
permanent injunction denied. 1t will be
a signal victory for the railroads and win
furnish a precedent that will no doubt be
a guide in making many future contract.
The contention of the railroad is that
there is nothing either In the state stat
utes or the regulations of the interstate
commerce law to prevent them from max
ing through rate contracts with the Mdi-
lory line TO the exclusion OF the Lone star
line IL they so desire and that they have
perfect right to demand the prepayment
of freight charges from one and not from
the other. II Is matter, they say ciearly
within the domain of private contract.
on the other hand If the Injunction
should be made perpetual II VIII be great
triumph for the Lone Star line. II con-
tends that the action of the railroads is n
conspiracy an organized effort TO drive 1t
out of business, thus leaving the entire
ocean carrying trade to the Mallory line.
| Upon Judge Bryants decision much Will
depend and all parties are awaiting IL
with anxiety.
In the meantime the temporary restrain
ing order remains III full force and effect.
At the opening of court Ibis morning
argument was resumed. MIR Hagermann OF
counsel for the Missouri, Kansas and
Texas railway read extracts from the re-
ports of the interstate commerce commits
sion In reference to the routing of through
freight, and contendet that the action OF
his line in making contract with the
Mallory Steamship company was not In
violation OF the provisions of the act,
Mr. John Neethe OF counsel for COM
plainants followed and cited numerous
authorities In support OF his contentious,
ard reviewed the authorities quoted by
defendants In support of their PROPOSE
ton thar their responsibilities MS common
carriers ceased when they reached the end
of their lines, and contended that such
was not the case. He also contendcd
that when q common carrier demanded
the prepayment OF freight from one Gus
toner il must do so from all. He also
called attention TO the high rate OF freight
exacted by the Mallory line before the ad-
vent of the Miami company and how the
rates had been cut in order TO drive the
Miami people Out of the business, and
falling In that contracts had been made
with the railroads by which the prepay
ment OF freight was 10 be demanded of
the Miami people in order TO force them
out OF business. lie did not think there
could be any possible hardship to defend
ants II The injunction was continued under
proper bond until final hearing could
be had.
Mr. j. w. Terry of counsel for the Gulf.
Colorado and Santa Fe railway addressed
the court. He held that the State statute
governing common carriers was not in
tended 10 apply TO interstate traffic and
thai the State had no power to act on
queetions concerning interstate trauspor-
tation That rhe railroads could make
local raSs higher in proportion 10 through
rates. and the State han no authority TO
interfere.
Mr.. Hagermann again addressed the
court and was followed by Mr. Neethc
At the conclusion OF the argument Judge
Bryant stated that as the questions in
voived were very important and as he de-
sired TO have thorough knowledge OF
the authorities cited by counsel on both
sides. he would ask that he be furnished
a list OF the authorities cited. His de-
cision would he the result Of his inyesti-
gntion and his conviction. He realized
the fact that decision was desired as
speedily as possible and would give one
as soon as consistent with thorough ex-
animation OF the authorities He stated
that he desired to hear no further argu-