The Saint Paul globe., 1904-04-05
COAL ROADS LOSE
IN SUPREME COURT
Decision in Anthracite Case
FaVOrS Contentious of Com
merce Commission.

WASHINGTON, D. c., April A
The case of the interstate commerce
commission versus Baird, commonly
known as the anthracite coal case,
was decided by the supreme court of
the United States today in favor of
the contentious of the commission, the
decision of the United States circuit
court for the Southern district of New
York being reversed.
This is the case instituted before the
commission by w. r. Hearst, of New
York, who alleged discrimination by
the railroad companies which reached
the anthracite coal mines in Pennsyl-
vania. During the hearing some of the
witnesses refused to produce certain
contracts bearing upon the business of
the railroad companies and the coal
mines, which action was upheld by the
circuit court of New York The United
States supreme court held that the
contracts should have been supplied.
The opinion was handed down by Jus
tice Day.
In handing down the opinion of the
court, Justice Day said that the case
had grown out of a complaint of w.
r. Hearst filed in 1902 with the inter
state commerce commission against the
Pennsylvania & Reading, the Lehigh
Valley, the Delaware & Lackawanna,
the Central Railroad Company of New
Jersey and other railroad companies,
and that it had come to this court
on an appeal from an order made in
the circuit court of the United States
for the Southern District of New York
In the matter of the petition of the
commissioners for orders requiring the
testimony of witnesses and the pro-
ductiOn Of certain books and papers in
pursuance Of the requirements of the
interstate commerce law. The first
point decided was that of jurisdiction,
which the court decided it had under
the law Of 1903, regulating interstate
commerce, and, therefore, refused to
entertain the motion to dismiss, which
was made by the railroad companies.
The court also held as irrelevant and
inapplicable the point made in behalf
of the railroad companies that Mr..
Hearst, the complainant. had sustained
no damage in the case, saying that un-
der the mandatory provision of the
law the commission could not do other
wise than investigate.
Coming to the specific items of testi-
mOny which the circuit court in dis
missing the petition considered irrele-
want, the court first considered the
coal purchase contracts. These con-
tracts were made with coal companies
owned principally by the railroad COM
pantes and fixed the price Of anthra-
cite coal, shipments to be made as
called for by the purchasers. While
contracts were produced for tnspec-
ton, the witnesses refused to permit
them to be given in evidence.
Must Produce Contracts.
In passing upon this point, Justice
Day said:
The railroads are all engaged in inter-
state commerce and into their affairs and
methods Of doing business the commission
sought to, and is lawfully authorized by
the commerce act, to make investigation.
The commission has the right to know
how interstate traffic is conducted, the
relations between the carrier and its ship
pers and the rates charged and collected
We see no reason why contracts of this
character which have direct relation to a
large amount of carrying trade can be
withheld from examination as evidence
by the committee.
1t is to be remembered that we are not