The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1901-08-15
RAILROADS WIN A
DECISIVE VICTORY
Long Fought South Dakota Rate
Case Has Been Finally
Adjusted.
U. S. JUDGE CARLAND'S DECISION
Declares That to Enforce Commission's
Proposed Schedule Would Take
Property of the Railroads With
out Sanction OF Law.

| SIOUX rails, >. D., aug. IZ.-JudSe
| Garland, of the United States court,
| late Friday afternoon filed his de-
| cision in the now celebrated South Da-
kota railroad rate case.
| His desicion is in substance as fol-
| lows: The schedule of maximum
| rates of charges for the transportation
of freight and passengers adopted, fixed
and established by the board of rail-
| road commissioners of South Dakota
| is held to be in violation of the consti-
| tuition Of the United States in this, to-
| wit: That the scedule, if enforced,
| would operate to take the property Of
| the railroad without just compensa-
ton; without due process of law, and
would deprive 1t OF the equal protec-
ton of laws. 1t is held that the
schedule adopted by the railroad COM
missioners would not afford the rail-
road company reasonable compensation
for the service performed.
The railroad commissioners and
their successors, agents. etc, are per-
petually enjoned and restrained from
putting into effect or attempting or
claiming to put into effect the schedule
of freight and passenger rates adopted
road company recover of the commits
sioners its costs to be taxed, together
with it's disbursements necessarily in
cured
Judge Garland further decides that
when circumstances have changed so
that the rates adopted in the schedule
shall yield the railroad company rea-
sonable compensation for the service
performed the board of railroad
commissioners can apply to his court,
by supplemental bill or otherwise, for
a further order in that behalf.
A Hard Fought Case.
The history of the case shows it to
be one of the most holly contested in
the legal annals of the country. Feb
ruary 8, 1897, the state legislature
passed an act empowering, among
other things, the state railroad COM
mission to prepare and put into effect
a maximum freight and passenger
tariff for the railroads doing business
in the state. The bill passed the legis-
lature by almost unanimous vote, re-
publicans, democrats and populists
practically to a man voting for it.
Prior to July l. 1897, when the bill
was to become effective, the railroad
commission, consisting of Messrs. Kirk
patrick, Tompkins and LaFollette, who
were elected by the fusionists at the
election in the fall of 1896, visited Des
Moines, Chicago and other eastern
points in quest of information which
would assist them in preparing what
they deemed proper and equitable
schedule. After many weeks labor
they were enabled to prepare a schedule
of passenger and freight rates, and in
tended promptly on July /, 1897 to pro-
mulgate it and put it into effect.
June 2, 1897, the railroad commission
had issued public notice to the rail-
roads and other corporations or per-
sons engaged as common carriers in
the state for the transportation of pas
sengers or property by railroads, as
we'll as interested shippers, that on
June FL, and from that time until July
l. they would be in session and grant
a public hearing to the corporations
and persons interested.
On June 20, 1897, attorneys represent
ing the Chicago, Milwaukee & st. Paul
the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, the
Chicago & Northwestern, the Great
Northern. the Chicago, st. Paul, Min
neapolis & Omaha, and the Fremont,
Elkhorn & Missouri Valley railroads
filed bills of complaint, praying for tenn
porary and permanent injunctions
against the threatened and intended
acts of the board of railroad commits
sioners to show cause why temporary
injunction should not be granted, and
set August 2, 1897, as the date for the
hearing. A restraining clause was in
serted in the order, preventing the com
mission from making. establishing or
promulgating without notice of hearing
given and had after July 1, 1897, any
schedule of passenger and freight
rates.
Deprive Them of Property.
August the hearing was held. At
torneys for the railroads appeared and
argued to the effect that any reduction
by the board of railway commissioners
IN the current rates of passenger and
freight fares would be depriving the
railroads of their property without due
process OF law. and of the equal protec-
ton Of the law. 1t was Contended that
the board OF commissioners Intended
reducing passenger rates to such an
extent that the earnings Of the rail-
roads from such sources would be 10
per cent less than at that time, and
that II this We're done the railroads
could not pay operating. expenses OF
their roads and interest on their bond
ed Indebtedness. The attorneys for the.
railroads also declared that the roads
were not able at the rates and fares
then charged by them in South Dakota
/ to pay The operating expenses and in.
sterest on their bonded indebtedness.
In reply the railroad commissioners
denied that they had prepared a sched-
ule of freight and passenger rates:
neither had they at any time threat
ened reduction OF 10 per cent or any
sum on freight transported over the
lines Of railroad In South Dakota, nor
had they agreed upon any maximum
passenger rates. The commissioners
declared that at the time the restrain
ing order was served upon them they
had not completed their investigat tons.
{ Judge Garland, In his decision deny
ing the Injunction, expressed the opin-
ION that all acts OF the railroad COM
missioners prior to July 1, 1897 were
void and Of no effect The defendants
could not give the notice required by
law ten days prior to July 1, decided
he, hence their attempted action was
Illegal, but the restraining order Of this
court prevented any action on July
1897, without the legal notice. and Ii il
not apparent that q temporary injunc-
ton could now restrain the board Of
railway commissioners from doing
spmething on July I, 1897. without no.
ttce; and 30 far as any future action
is concerned. must presume the board
0f railway commissioners will obey and
comply with the law. So on this branch
~ this case there seems to be no neces-
{ slty Tor q Temporary Injunction,