Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-05-13
lSU|T BY KANSAS LOST|AT THE WHITE HOUSE
Attempt to Enion the State OF Delay in Appointment of Sand
/ 50 Colorado. sss ers' Successor.
USE OF ARKANSAS WATERS ICORTELYOUS REPUTED WISH
Georgia Granted Injunction Against Hope Entertained of Maying Strife
Tennessee Corporations in New York
SCOPE OF THE EIGHT HOUR LAW QUESTION DISCUSSED
Does Not Apply The
i Dredges Case Of ohm
Attempt to Enioin the State OF
aia Colorado.
USE OF ARKANSAS WATERS
Georgia Granted Injunction Against
Tennessee Corporations.
SCOPE OF THE EIGHT-H0UR LAW
Does Not Apply to Laborers on
Dredges = Affects Contracts for
River and Harbor Improvements.

River and Harbor improvements.
The somewhat famous case Of the state
OF Kansas against the state Of Colorado.
by which the former sought to have the
latter enjoined from diverting the waters
Of the Arkansas river for irrigation pur-
poses or permitting its citizens to do So,
was dismissed by the Supreme Court of the
United States today. The announcement
Of the courts decision was made by Justice
Brewer. who said that the dismissal was
without prejudice to the right Of Kansas
to serve its petition whenever It can be
shown that that state Is being substan-
TALLY injured. The intervening petition of
the United States also was dismissed.
Georgia Granted Injunction.
In an opinion by Justice Holmes, the su-
preme Court granted the Injunction asked
by the state Of Georgia against the Ten
Eessee Copper Company and the Duck
town Sulphur and Copper Company, re-
straining those companies from the opera
ton OF their smelters at Ducktown. Tenn.
The shelters IRE very near the Georgia
hne. and that state asked to have them
condemned as public and private nui-
sance. alleging that they constituted a
great injury to vegetation for a radius OF
Scope Of Eight-Hour Law.
Justice Holmes today announced the de-
cision Of the court In a number of cases in
voiving the construction of the eight-hour
law OF 1892 by which the employment of la
borers and mechanics on public works La
limited to eight hours per day. The defend
ants were all prosecuted criminally and
were all found guilty and fined by the trial
court The suits were instituted especially
Tor the purpose Of testing the applicability
OF the law to laborers and mechanics en-
pioyed on dredges in river and harbor I'M
provements, but other points also were
necessarily involved. The court held the
law to be constitutional. but held that 1t
does not apply to laborers and mechanics
on dredges, and that men so employed can
works.
came to the Supreme Court on writs Of err
ror from the United States district court for
the district Of Massachusetts,. Justice
Holmes opinion was based on the cases Of
Company against the United States and all
the other six cases were decided along the
same lines. Justice Moody delivered. a dis
senting opinion.
The decision win have immediate bearing
upon the letting Of contracts for the
$87. 5000 worth Of river and harbor work
authorized by the last session Of Congress.
Most Of the contracts under that law were
the settlement Of the cases.
Justice Holmes opinion that men em-
p1oyed on dredges in river and harbor i'm
provements are not laborers or mechanics
was based on the ground that in effect such
men are seamen to whom the law is not
applicable. He said that all other employ
ment is incidental to the work Of the men
On the dredges. and to their services as
seamen, and that, therefore, they must be
classified as seamen.
Justice Moody held a Numerically oppo-
site view, declaring that the duties OF the
men in handling the dredges are incidental
to their work as laborers. Their principal
duty was that Of digging and removing
dirt, and the fact that they are employed
court, he said, had noting to do. with the
policy Of Congress in enacting the law.
Justices Harlan and Day concurred In the
dissenting opinion.
Decided Against Hawaii.
In an opinion by Justice McKenna the
court decided the case Of Lowrey and
others agt the territory Of Hawaii against
the territory. This case involved claim
for $4,000 on account Of alleged breach
Of contract in connection with the old mis-
sion school at Lahainaluna. Lowrey and
his associates are trustees Of the Ameri-
can board of foreign missions, and they
was established by that board and after
ward turned over to the territory, was
converted into an agricultural college, thse
terms of the contract. which bound the
anything but sound literature. and solid
science" were violated The trustees con-
tended for construction OF the contract
such as would compel the teaching of the
the restoration of the property to the
board or the payment of $4,000, as agreed
in the original contract.
Dispute Between Bridge Companies.
In an opinion by Justice Day the court
decided the case Of R. G. Stone and others
agt. the Southern Illinois and Missouri
Bridge Company In favor Of the bridge
company. The case arose in connection
with an effort on the part of the bridge
company to condemn for its uses twenty
acre parcel of ground at the Missouri end
Of the railroad bridge crossing the Mssis-
sippi river at Grays Point, and in the
course of the proceedings the fact devel-
oped that the opposition was due to the
Cape Girardeau and Thebes Terminal
Bridge Company. which also desired the
land. The circuit court of Dunkiin county
decided against the Southern Illinois COM
pany. holding that being an Illinois cor
poration, 1t had no authority to condemn
land in Missouri. The state supreme court
of Missouri reversed that judgment. and
the federal Supreme Court by its action to-
day affirmed that decision.
to petition from the interstate commission
in proceeding begun by Proctor & Gam
Bile, an Ohio concern. which complained
that In removing common soap in less than
carload lots from the fourth class and
putting 1t In the third the railroad COM
rany had been guilty of discrimination in
favor Of other articles. Afterward the
company reduced the rate to the extent of
20, per cent, but the circuit court decided
against the classification even then, as re-
quested by the commission, and its deci-
sion was affirmed.
Wyoming University Wins.
The court decided the controversy between
the Wyoming Agricultural College and the
University of Wyoming as. to which Of those
two institutions is entitled to the national
government funds contributed to the state
for the support Of an agricultural college in
favor Of the university, affirming the YER
dict of the Wyoming supreme court.
The case was instituted by the agricul-
tural college. located at Lander, which set
up a claim for $4,000 paid by the national
government for the year 1905. The state
supreme court decided in favor Of the uni
yefsity, which Is located at Laramie. and
which maintains an agricultural depart
ment under state sanction, holding that the
funds should continue to go to that insti-
tuition until further legislation ON the sub
jeat.
The opinion was by Justice Moody. who
held that "a fyfvernynent GRO pfs az.