The Washington times., 1906-03-29
Shearn Says Supreme
Court Rules in New
Workers. Favor.
BITUMIN0US DECISION
Basis of CounSel'S Argument
Against Anthracite
Companies.

Before the Interstate Commerce Com
mission the Hearst cases against the
anthracite railroads are being reargued
today, on the initiative of the commits
sion, for the purpose of applying to
them the principles laid down by the
Supreme Court a few days ago in the
famous and sweeping decision in the
case of the Chesapeake and Ohio roads
rates on contract coal TO New Haven.
Clarence ]. Shearn, attorney for
Hearst. took the position that the Su-
creme Court had won the case for Mr..
Hearst when II handed down its de-
cision in the bituminous case involving
The West Virginia fields.
In that case the court held that the
railroad company could not sell its own
coal and, by shading its tariff rate on
naulage, enable itself to undersen Other
and competing coal producers who had
no such relations with carriers, and
must pay the full rate for carriage The
Supreme Court took the position that
this rule applied, whether the railroad
company directly or indirectly, through
a coal company which it controlled, car
ried on the transaction. The effect was
the same, and the effect was the ming
20 be considered. The Supreme CourJ
went so far as to indicate the opinion
that railroad companies ought not tC
engage in other business than that OF
carriage.
Very similar points were raised in the
Hearst cases. The anthracite roads con-
tracted TO haul coal to seabOard and
New England points for subsidiary COM
panies which they controlled or were
in alliance with. These contracts were
attacked as of a character calculated "a
prejudice The independent miner and
shipper. The case was started over
three years ago. Il record of over 6,O0
pages Of testimony, arguments, and
the daeszlSa si9 thac cGnesap peake and Ohio
case, the commission called on the at
torneys for further argument.
Mr. Shearn appeared for Hearst, while
Tor the railroads appeared G. F.
Brownell of the Erie: Robert w De-
Forest. of the Central Railroad of New
Jersey; Joseph d. Campbell, of the
nigh Valley; w. s. Jenney, ot the
Lackawanna. and ]. B. Kerr. of tt on
tsrfo and Western. Mr.. Shearn Gat first
heard. and spoke at much length, apply
ng the Chesapeake and Ohio decision to
he case at bar. Commissioners Knapp
Clements, PrOuty, and Cockrell sat
In the Chesapeake and Ohio case the
railroad urged that 1t sustained the loss
not as carrier, but as merchant. The
court held that the road had no bust
ness occupying the position of both car
rler and merchant; and this, Mr.. Shear
argued is substantially the position o.
The anthracite roads in the present hear
ing.
The separate corporate entities of tn.
railroad and the coal companies wa.
Urged as reason why the Chesap apeak,
and Ohio contracts, made through
1ominally separate coal corporation
we're legal. But the Supreme Cour
crushed all this aside and insisted OF
considering essentials; and, considering
.hese, held that the railroad could no
10 Indirectly what it could not do di
rectly. The same rule. applied to tn
anthracite cases, Mr.. Shearn said
would win them for Mr. Hearst
Mr.. Shearn was followed by represen
-atives of the railroad companies
vas not expected this afternoon that tn
lrguments would be concluded todav