The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-09-24
ROUTING CASES.
Final Decree Entered in an Important
Railroad Suit.

Los Angeles, Sept. 24.-FinaI decree
In the fruit routing cases has been en-
tered in the United States circuit court
by Judge WelIborn, enjoining and re-
straining the defendant railway COM
panies, the Southern Pacific, Santa Fe
and connecting lines from further dis
obedience of the orders of the inter-
state commerce commission.
Immediately after court convened
Judge Wellborn announced that the de-
cree in the case as submitted to him
would be entered, if there was no OBJ
lection on the part of the attorneys for
the railway companies.
z. E. Milliken, on behalf of the de-
PENDANT railway companies, objected to
the entry of any decree in the ease
upon the ground that Judge Wellborn
has no jurisdiction or authority to
make or enter a judgment therein, for
the reason that under the provisions of
the act of congress of February IL,
1908, the said proceeding could be heard
only before three of the circuit judges
of the circuit court of the United States
for the ninth judicial circuit, and de-
PENDANTS hereby request and pray that
this proceeding be assigned for hearin g
before the circuit judges of the ninth
judicial circuit
Judge Wellborn promptly overruled
the objection, saying that the act in
question did not apply to cases such
such cases where the United States was
the plaintiff, and ordered the decree en-
tered as follows:
Issue having been Joined the testi-
mony having been taken and the cause
having been duly argued and submitted
and the court being fully advised in
the premises now finds that determines,
that the allegations of fact made in the
bill of complaint herein are true, and
that the defendants and their eastern
connections, said connections being diff
ferent and competing railroads, filed
with the interstate commerce commits
sion pursuant to previous agreement
between them. a joint tariff relating to
citrus fruits, and fixing thereon
through rate of S1.25 a hundred pounds
from Southern California to all points
east of the Missouri river, and that said
agreement and tariff contain, among
others, the following provision:
I'm guaranteeing the drought rate
named herein. the absolute and I'M
qualified right of routing beyond its
own terminal is reserved to initial car
rier giving the guarantee
That said agreement and tariff are
now in force and observed by all the
parties thereto. and that the said rout-
ing provision so agreed upon and en-
bodied in said tariff is an agreement
and combination for the pooling of
freights of different and competing
railroads, and violative of section five
of the commerce act mentioned in said
bill of complaint, and that the order
of the interstate commerce commits
sion attached to and made a part of
said bill of complaint and hereinafter
set forth is a lawful order, and that
defendants have ever since its issuance
violated and disobeyed the same in all
of it's requirements That said order is
in words and figures as follows: No.
575-The Consolidated Forwarding
company vs. the Southern Pacific COM
pany, the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe
I11f1 To
cific Railway company, and the South
ern California Railway company. No.
5 76-The Southern California Fruit
Exchange VS.. the Southern Pacific