New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1906-02-20
RAILROAD LOSES SUIT.
MIST MAINT4IN RATES.
Decision May Haze Important Bear
ing on Affairs of Coal Roads.
From The Tribune Bureanl

= ,Aa contract does not pay the cost OF pur-
Aose the cost OF delivery and the published
s-.,eht rates?" This was the question involved
:, q decision Of the United States Supreme court
,o-dsv which may, have important bearing
: ~. controversy that is about TO arise as the
-.sult Of an investigation 10 be ordered by Con
e-sss into the relations between the railroads
- .h.,r coal properties. The decision was on
,csse appealed 10 the Supreme Court by the
T,,.rstate Commerce Commission and the New
vorl New-Haven and Hartford Railroad COM
many against the Chesapeake and Ohio Ralroau
Ionpany. The Chesapeake and Ohio lost
7. rer,ains to be seen how extensive the apph-
..-ion Of the decision 20 the practices or other
,suroads In their dealings with their coal prop
.--3es viii be Its significance is due TO the fact
,na. Il comes on the eve OF a far reaching IN
,,.stigation into the operations OF the coal own
,-g and coal carrying roads. One effect Of the
ACCESSION IS said 20 be certain-namely, 70 stiInu-
,s,s interest in the proposed investigation and
~ assure the passage Of the resolution ordering
r.. Public attention has been attracted 10 the
sub3ect IN q manner TO urge action. and this
verdict Of the court Of last resort Will clinch
,be Efforts TO force an inquiry.
VOL. ArEs INTERSTATE COMMERCE LAW.
Briefly stated. the decision hinged on the prop
osi-ion whether railroad, being a purchaser
and seller OF coal, as well as a transporter OF
che product could minimize its rates for carry
ing the coal 10 point where profit could be
made on the contract The court decided in the
negative, holding the practice TO be subVerslNe
n. the Interstate Commerce law. which requires
a published rate for carrying IN which all shaII
share alike. The C and o. was perpetually en-
,oined from taking less than the rates fixed In
SIS published tariff by means Of dealing in the
purchase and sale Of coal.
While that decision was being handed down
the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce was acting on the resolution offered
by Senator Tilnan. which has passed the Sen
ate. directing an inquiry into the whole subject
Of the business Of the coal owning and coal
carrying railroads A special meeting Of the
committee had been called. and the Tillrnan res
olution was thoroughly canvassed. The out
come was the reference of the resolution 10
subcommittee, consisting Of Chairman Hepburn
and Mr.. Townsend, the latter an earnest advo-
cate OF railroad restriction. They viii report a
perfected resolution tomorrow, providing
comprehensive investigation. There is no ques-
ton that the resolution viii be adopted. and the
Interstate Commerce Committee VIII be directed
70 make the inquiry. The perfected resolution
viii widen the scope Of the investigation, TO take
in all the coal carrying roads.
Lawyers in the House will examine to-day's
decision OF the Supreme Court TO ascertain its
bearing on the business Of the coal roads. No
one would give opinion this afternoon on the
question OF whether It will apply 10 any situa-
ton existing with respect 10 other roads In
fact that question probably VIII not be decided
until the Interstate Commerce Commission
makes an investigation to determine whether
there is a parallel case. The significance Of it
all is that Congress is thoroughly aroused over
a situation supposed to exist at any rate. and
VII see 10 II that all the facts are brought out.
Another interesting development of the day
was the announcement by the Interstate Com
merce Commission that it had ordered an in
Vestgation OF the rates and practices Of rail-
roads engaged in transporting oil from Kansas
snd Indian Territory 10 interstate destinations.
The hearings viii begin in Kansas City on
March T.
THE COURTS OPINION:
Justice White, who delivered the opinion of the
court IN the railroad case, said there were prac-
ucally no previous decisions of the court TO
quote as presidents. because heretofore the
features OF the Interstate Commerce law dealing
with Determinations, rebates and favoritism
have not been involved in cases in the court.
1t cannot" he said be challenged that the
while seeking 10 prevent unjust and unreason-
shle rates, was 10 secure equality of rates as
to al and TO destroy favoritism. Now in view
OF the positive command Of the second section
Of the act, that no departure from the published
rate shall be made, directly indirectly how
can b. IN reason be held that a carrier may take
Itself from out The statute in every case by
simply eecting 10 be a dealer and transport
commodity IN that character? For, Of course.
Il carrier has a right 10 disregard the pub
Ished rates by resorting TO q particular form Of
dealing. il must follow that there is no obliga-
Ton on the part OF a carrier TO adhere TO the
rates. because doing so is merely voluntary. The
all embracing prohibition against either directly
OF Indirectly charging less than The published
rates shows that the purpose Of the statute was
10 make the prohibition applicable TO every
method of dealing by a carrier by which the
forbidden result could be brought about"
Proceeding, he declared the purpose Of the
sct 20 be Ito compel the carrier as a public
agent 70 give equal treatment to all" He add
&c.
Vow, IL by the mere fact Of purchasing and
selling merchandise 10 be transported carrier
If endowed with the power Of disregardlng the
published rate. Il becomes apparent that the car
rier possesses the right 10 treat the owners Of
Ike commodities by entirely different rules In
tefpreting The prohibitions of the statute IL is
contended they should be. il would follow that
every Individual would be bound by the pub
hshec tariff and the carrier alone would be free
70 disregard H. Thus the statute while sub
lecurg the public 10 the prohibitions would
exempt the carrier and would thereby enor-
inously increase the opportunities Of the latter
70 90 the wrongs which the statute was enacted
70 prevent
And the considerations previously stated serve
also 10 demonstrate that the prohibitions OF the