New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-02-01
THE TRANSFER CASES.
Lehmaier Says Decision Does Not
DEM Right to Them.

e rh,,s,er cave out yesterday the fol-
,-I-g statement OF the COMMITTEES OF cOuhsei %
-. ,rsnsii reform committee OF one huhoieo re-
ne s decision Of the Court Of Appeals In the
Zee transfer mandamus case
-. ss,t.ion does not deny the right OF Tree Trans
.. ~ : aect any OF the penalty cases -. a., 49,.
The reason why the appear Is oSaeT hi the case
:, IN e5t 70 thar e il haa any o 0ssTeI %
sheher or not ~ comDe4 ne g. 80 We therefore,
gD.y sti..o5 10 concede that the Court OF Appears
rst deci6e against us u the 80 ~ Dositio1
tst mere IS plain. SPECIFIC. peTeInpto i S,z
sG;y imposed upon PSo 1Sbi5c no individual being
100 interested in its observance .Las a. ysiiaSis
snd theTe t,i5c - whole except the harsh ana
s1sT0rv proceeding to revoke lEe ~, ~ g their
nta'.t -Crrts have no discretion Dui II - lue-L
tet " ovSer the corporation TO obey IL ls now low
e+tle6 that this Is not the law Drt T-7t1 now h
isgisiarure should make II tie INV ~
-,e court adds some discussion ~ 70 ~ etr5efiy
,eieyanT 10 g dismissal Of u apRea-' ~ law hi
vii COUNTLESS be received d sTne5v by actions Tor
,,snsiiies and damages. and 20 us A.'o he In
trals en- -o, - charter. II expresses The
w. nat nlandamus is m7racucauie ~ ,i,,,,i,,s
ths 5 ibs is perhaps not to be taken too liter
sf~ as Il seems 10 conccdc M - 70 f-1sd
Seoev-,,ssio1 rad recommended IL. II holes now
ever that our courts have ict pow. a ,o,sTsuV
n-,iv win a Law imposed for the beneht OF ~
oubfe- however plain the law may De mr..
SeIiroad Commission FIRST directs u 20 Ho ~. law
court nav then order compliance nol W. ' -Tle
80 r-i+r ne direction OF The comlras on. 4 az
Attorney General IS no better OF un1tI - -
snc Of The opinion than private - -r,i[.
,,o4arlission does not direct The rall!oau f-,.
we can nothing unless the MAJ e--,-- - ne
enough 20 warrant reyoking tle cha-'e u '--'
IT, Situation thus disclosed Is due 20 our Tecu!iar
.--firte Receutlv in Richmond the couilS on =
sl.cauon of citizen ORDERED 81 ste 0o,rfs on
.riye free transfers. Sc In thlcleo tLe c-t.,s,ss
1nrlicatior Of q citizen ordered SUI 70 ~ -
~6rnnanv 10 give twelve tickets lot g. -,
r.ue TIE u,andauus was a4hrlnel y lAe ee.tS -
Court u the state anc no toeu .rf,,, .s - tbs
.neo--ing IL Tho statutory ir-FssilA - >, -
fi,-I ,,-r--iesio- upon which the court bases
lis decision here. does not eNpfcssg So. - -,
r0r,rrfssiou-s power is exclusive dIe 49, -.
a., I,tn not the same efficient ftleNs -, ,i,-s,
,no,- hove in Eirsinia and llInols ahG We "a
81 ieqfsation should be i1lIneoate-E - 49, 80
t,-Esr thai we may set II 30 hoaL1 - 4 - a
tC,Iis bgve discretion whether rallroad sIou',
-. ,.ovonees 10 obey a plain and positive t5N a
,-sf,rosS commission Is eStaollSleu Aui bAs
"a ybe ,rrlc not Of the railroads ana no puN.l
,5ehf should be delayed or diminished og us
fS " nus wait for commission 70 act 81 IS an
.6aitonal reason Tor a local railroad conhsslsli
- rms cf-,a measure which last year the inter-
urban companN's attorney Was tie ONLY man ~
,1-nose before the Assembly committed.
Tho rnardaruS case was commenced last year
fecrIrse 4 was the only possible way OF oulalnllt
a decision fron the highest courts as 10 the duty OF
The railroad company. which tnen telnsel 10 -,
,lsl discrimination Of the question. by the LoILE-
nate accident Of adverse decision aEalfst the
a,laiutiT By one municipal justice the plalnuu Wae
enabled 10 take OF the penalty cases 70 lie
Annellate Term OF the Supreme Court, which De
cided IN his favor, and the main question IS mus
on its way 20 the highest court