Morris tribune. [volume] (Morris, Minn.) 1880-2000, 1906-02-10
DOES OLD LAW
Prohibit PASSES?
RAILROAD COMMISSIONER STA.
PIES BELIEVES 1T DOES.

- "a Aoo<s W 3HSAA 40 AAEA AA
Force, Prohi tied Railroads fir ON
Granting Any Preference or rlak-
ing Any Discrimination. Either
in Carrying Passengers or Pro-
perty.
Does Minnesota's present law pro-
hibit railroad companies from issuing
passes?
Z. F. Staples of the railroad commits
sion believes that it does, but the stat
utes have never been construed on
that point by any legal authority.
Judge Mills, chairman of the commits
sion, does not think the law covers
passes. Attorney General Young has
not examined it thoroly, but comedies
that it might be SO construed.
1t is the old law of 1887, which Gre
ated the railroad commission, that is
cited as prohibiting passes. The law
passed last winter forbade railroads
from giving passes to shippers, and
forbade shippers to ask or receive
them, but did not touch other passes.
The legislature in fact distinctly re-
fused TO abolish passes.
According to the Staples view, how-
ever, pass is discrimination and an
unlawful preference, and is therefore
forbidden by the law of 1887. That
act covers the subject in two different
sections In section 2, which is section
$50 of the General Statutes of 1894, it
says:
"AH charges made by any common
carrier, subject to the provisions of
this act, for any services rendered or
to be rendered in the transportation
Of passengers or property as aforesaid
shall be equal and reasonable, and
every unequal and unreasonable
charge for such service is prohibited
and declared to be unlawful.
'EIt shall be unlawful for any COM
mon carrier to make or give any un-
e1ual or unusual preference Or ad-
vantage to any particular person,
company, firm, corporation or local
ity, or to subject any particular per-
son, company, firm, corporation or
locality, or any particular description
of traffic, to any unequal Or unreason-
able prejudice Or disadvantage in any
respect whatsoever"
In section 5. which is section 3S3 of
the 1894 statutes, the act says: 'sIf
any common carrier, subject to the
provisions of this act, shall directly Or
indirectly, by any special rate, rebate,
drawback or other device. charge, de-
mand, collect or receive from any
person or persons greater Or less
compensation for any service render
ed or to be rendered, in the transpor-
tation of passengers or properly sub
ject to the provisions of this act, than
it charges, demands, collects Or re-
ceived from any other person Or per-
sons for doing for him Or them a like
and contemporaneous service in the
transportation of passengers or pro-
perty, such common carrier shall be
deemed guilty of discrimination,
which is hereby prohibited and made
unlawful"
This law is still in force, violations
are punishable by fine of not more
than 81 900 for each offense, which
may be imposed on the corporations
or on the official responsible
Mr.. Staples believes the language of
this law broad enough to include
passes. 'tThe legislature which pass
ed the act," says Mr.. Staples, "may
not have had passes in mind, as they
are not mentioned by name, but it in
tended to destroy all preference and
discrimination, and if passes are not
mr. ,ference to certain persons, and
discriminations against all others, |
do not understand the meaning of
those words"
Attorney General Young says he
would be willing to assist in having
the law tested, if anyone wants to
bring it up. He was strongly in favor
of the anti pass law last winter. AS
masses are not mentioned in the law,
he thinks it a serious question whether
thew are included, but the language of
the statute is broad enough to cover
about anything.
CAST ORA