The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-02-27

agreement under which these excur-
sions are conducted provides that the
| rates shall apply only to Minnesota, the
| Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas and as far
West as Idaho. In this. they claim
there has been an attempt to cut out
territory along their lines in favor OF
Utah, Colorado and other western
states. 1t is to meet and counteract
this alleged discriminate ton that the
Northern Pacific and Great Northern
have made their rates apply to Mon
tana. Oregon and Washington points.
AS these localities are also reached
by southern lines. the Union Paclhc.
Burlington and others have announced
that they will not stand quietly ASIDE
and see competing lines make a lower
rate than their tariff provides, and Will,
unless the northern lines withdraw,
meet the rate on coming excursions.
The Oregon Short Line. Denver & Rio
Grande and Rio Grande Western will
doubtless follow whatever pollcy IS
adopted by the Union Pacific. All agree
that their interests in the Northwest
are of too great Importance to risk los
ing any traffic by the action of any
competing line.
Railroad men are discussing with
great deal of interest decision regard
ing the movements of fast trains which
was handed down by the United States
supreme court a few days ago. This de-
cision is in effect that trains are run
only to subserve the public convenience
and that if this interest requires the
stoppage of all trains at a given sta
ton the trains will have to be brought
to standstill The question is one of
uncommon interest as it affects the
running of all fast trains. few of these
flyers making many stops in their long
runs.
The case before the supreme court
was one brought under the laws Of
Ohio. which require that any railroad in
the state shall have at least three
trains day. if that many are run. to
stop at every station along the line
having a population of 5000 or over.
The Lake Shore habitually has run one
of it's fast trains through the city Of
West Cleveland without stop. Resi-
dents of that place asked the officials OF
the road for another train, but the re-
quest was refused. Thereupon the peo-
pie took the case into the courts.
Attorneys of the railroad commended
that the statute is unconstitutional in
that it interferes with the Interstate
commerce law, under which all traffic
between the states is regulated The
court however, held this contention TO
be badly founded saying that the only
question involved was that OF SubSerN-
ing the public convenience and declar-
ing that the state has the right to legis-
late TO that end. The judgment of the
supreme court of Ohio was therefore
affirmed.
Justice Harlan delivered the opinion.
Justices Brewer. Shiras, White and
Peckham dissented and Messrs. White
and Shiras delivered dissenting opin-
ions. Justice White based his opinion
on the ground of discrimination against
through trains. and Justice Shiras held
that as through trains carry through
mail they are subject to the Interstate
commerce law. The question. he said,
was one of convenience to the great
body of the people and not to those of
locality.
This opinion said a prominent
western passenger man. "may be made
to work great hardship upon the trans
portation companies and cause a great
many changes in the running of
through trains. Hardly any road in the
West has three trains a day stopping
at country towns of 1000 inhabitants.
Express and mail trains run through
these towns usually at a high rate Of
speed. 1t is necessary for the railroads
to run them in that way in order to
give the through passengers good ser
vice. While it is probable that no other