The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-09-25
kNUCkED IN HEAD
Implement Rate Case Is Soon
Disposed OF.
Board Holds That Suit Was
Improperly Brought.
HITS THE CATTLE CASE
Decision Also Applies to That
Action.
Carr Taylor Says Decision of
Board Is Wrong.
HITS THE CATTLE CASE

Inc implement rate case was knocked
out without a hearing on Monday after
noon by the state board of railroad COM
missioners.
A. A Hurd, advisory counsel for the
Santa F'e, raised the point that the title
Of the case did not comply with the
requirements Of the law, and the board,
after hearing arguments from Mr.. Hurd
n. H. LOOMS of the Union Pacific, J. H
Richards Of the Missouri Pacific and
Paul Walker of the Rock Island, on be-
half of the railroads, and Carr Taylor,
in defense Of the case as drawn, decided
that the railroads had the better of the
argument and refused to hear the case
The title which the board held to be
defective was as follows:
THE Southwest Kansas Implement
and Hardware Dealers association, and
the state of Kansas, ex rel Carr ".
Taylor, attorney for the board of rail-
road commissioners Of the state Of Kan
sas;
VERSUS:
1.-The Missouri Pacific, Atchison, To-
peka & Santa F'e, Rock Island, Union
Pacific, Missouri, Kansas & Texas, FRS
co and st. Joseph and Grand Island rail-
way companies
It was the contention of the railroad
companies that neither the Southwest
Kansas Implement & Hardware Deal
ers' association, nor the state of Kansas,
ex rel Carr ". Taylor, has the right to
bring an action or file a complaint be-
fore the board.
This point has never before been
raised. and number OF cases have
heretofore been tried by the board, nota-
bly, the salt rate case, in which the only
complainant was The state of Kansas,
ex rel Carr ". Taylor
Section 8 Of the railroad law, under
which the board knocked out the imple-
ment case begins as follows: 1t shall
be the duty of said board Of railroad
,Ir,fr
any person, firm or corporation, or the
mayor of any city, or the attorney for
the board to make an imned-
late examination of such complaint
The contention was that neither of
the parties mentioned in the title to the
action could be construed as being
person. firm, corporation, nayof or at
torney for the board.
Ends the Cattle Rate Case.
The decision of the board on Mon
day afternoon also has the effect of
putting the general cattle rate case,
set for hearing on Wednesday, into the
ditch. The cattle rate case is entitled
State of Kansas. ex rel Carr w.
Taylor" and under the ruling Of the
board today, the state has no right to
bring complaint on rates.
There is still one branch of the cat
tie case left, which was brought by b.
L. Stevens, a member of the board of
county commissioners of Clark county,
complaining of the rates from that
held to be good and valid, and the
case will probably be heard on
Wednesday.
after the decision of the board was
announced, D. W. Blaine of Pratt,
Kan, president of the Southwest Kan
sas Implement Dealers association,
said:
1--WE did not want to try this case
before the present board, but we didn't
like to get Knocked out in this way.
action on behalf of the implement
men Just as soon as a new board of
railroad commissioners takes Office"
Carr Taylor, attorney for the board.
said:
''The board is certainly off in this
ruling. That portion of the law defin-
ing my duties provides very clearly
that I shall begin my actions in the
name of the state. and that IS what
did,
Asked for a Continuance.
When the implement rate case came
on for trial there was a good attend
ance of implement men, brought here
on subpOenas to give testimony con-
corning rates. Those present were d.
w Blaine of Pratt, H. G. Taylor of
Lyons, Fred A. Zutavern of Great
Bend. Albert Van Zant and W. A.
johnson of Wichita. s. H Milton of
Winfield and w. H. Hubbard Of Con-
way Springs.
The railroads were represented by all
their attorneys and leading freight
traffic officials.
The attorney for the board, Carr
Taylor, opened the fight by asking the
+ ard to continue the case until Febru-
airy. The implement men had decided,
after q conference, that they would try
to have the consideration of their case
laid over until after the election, and
a new board was in charge of the Of
fee The board. however, refused to
grant any delay.
Then A. A. Hurd threw his bomb
shell concerning the title of the case,
and after the matter had been argued
for several hours, the board took the
case under consideration. The con-
sultation lasted for about 80 minutes,
after which the board listened to some
more arguments. The board then de-
cided that the contention of the rail-
road companies should be sustained.
I'VE are unanimous in the opinion,
said Chairman Wheatley, that if we
should make an order in a case having
a title like this, that the order would
not be sustained by the courts"