The St. Louis Republic., 1905-11-18
Failure Of Government to Amend
Bill Of Complaint to Conform
to Elkins Act Cited.
ATTACK COURT JURISDICTION.
Suit Should Be Brought in Kan
sas. Where Defendants Prin-
cipal Office Is, Say Rail-
roads Attorneys.

Kansas City. Nov. IA hearing Of the
erel Governmen. in March. lsce upon be-
the Atchison. Topeka and Santa Fe Rail
way. the Chicago burlington and Quincy.
the Missouri Pacific and the Chicago.
to-day In the United States District Court
before Judge John r. Phillips,
Assistant Tinted states Attorney General.
and A. II. Van valkenburxh. United
States District Attorney for the Western
Chicago. chief counsel for the Santa F-.
ana Judge s. ". Spencer Of St. Joseph.
chief counsel of the Burlington. repre-
sented those railway companies
CITED FOR CONTEMPT.
The railroads named We're originally en-
Joined by Judge Phillips from granting al
legged rebates on meat products. salt and
coal. and later contempt proceedings We're
fled in the Distr Ct Court here by Assist
ant Attorney General Purdy. who. aiieE-
ing that the railroad companies had Vio-
lated the courts enjo.n!nx order, asked
the court to cite the companies officials
Tor contempt. which was done.
To thus citation tho IA lroais filed de-
murrers. which were argued to-day.
Arguing on behalf Of the Santa fe Rail
way to-day. Cara ner lathrop took the
stand that the district lacked Jurisdiction
IN IN" case.
The proceedings against the Santa Fe
the Missouri Pacific and the Rock Island
all. .ged that these companies gave re-
bates To the Hutch nsOn IkaS.b Salt Com
pany. IL collusion with the Hutchinson
and Arkansas River Railroad VIII ch lat
ter company. IL was shown. was controlled
and operated by the salt company.
REBATES ON COAL
In the case Of the Santa re. 1, was al.
legged in adiitiOn that rebates had beer
granted OH coal TO the Colorado Fuel and
Iron Company.
The hearing was UPON two motions. one
TO Quash the information In regard To the
alleged rebates charged to have been paic
10 The Hutchinson ,kash Salt Company
and III, other 10 the Colorado Fuel anC
Iron Company.
Tn. Atchison. Topeka and Santa Ft
Railroad Company cont.nded that III,
origina! bill had been improperly filed. Al
the instance and upon the mere reques; o
that 1t was nIed before the passage o.
the Elk!ns act. and that prior TO tht
passag. q! the EIkns act the court hac
no Jurisdiction TO entertain such q bill
tha; this point was expressly decided BY
the United States Supreme Court In the
case "f the Government against III. Mis-
sour. Pacific Railway Company.
SAY ORDER Is VOID.
This decision Wa. after the filing Of th'
III! In this case. The railway contende,
that having no jurisdiction. the restrain.
Ing order issued was void and could moi
be made the foundation for n con,emp
proceeding. tnat Since the passage OF the
Elk act Their. had been no amendmen,
mad. 10 the bill Of complaint. SO that shcr,
was ro charge by IN. bill W any v.ola;i
OF law since the passage Of the Elk.n.
i;.W- which alone gave any authority 70,
proceeding OF this kind.
This Railway company further conterdet
that even after IN. Passage ~ the Elkin.
."i the cour; In Missouri had no juriSi g
ton because Of article Is o: the In,ers;at I.
Commerce act. that suit could b. brought
ard maintained only In ~. ju.isdic;iona
district where IL had its principal office
and that II would he in kansas wh.r
the bill alleged Il was Incorporated
Also II was contenicd thar tn. bill ryooy
It's IA - did not a!leE- that any %. the act,
cufnplaife ed of Were committed within this
judicial district. bu; elsewhere and beyonJ
its limits