The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-06-04
STATE FILES ANSWERS IN
 RAILROAD INJUNCTION SUITS

tcrminiug the validity or reasonable ness of the rates fixed by said act for said intra-state freight: they deny that said competition will necessitate re- duction by complainant of rates al- lowed by said act for transportation of intfa-state freight: and they deny that any necessity for such reduction by complainant, Las or should have any effect in determining the validity of said act, or in determining the validity or reasonableness of said rates estab- lished by the safnc.
 ''Sixteenth-And defendants for an- swer to paragraph sixteenth of said bill say; that they deny each and every allegation and averment thereof
 Denial of Increased Expenses.
 ''Seventeenth-And defendants for answer to paragraph seventeenth Of said bill say: they admit that the Leg islature of the State of Alabama by an act approved February g, 1907, estab- lished as maximum rates. the freight rates in force January 1, 1907. as stated in said paragraphs; but they deny that any of the rates of complainant in force on said first of January were un- reasonably low, and they deny that any of said rates were intended to be temporary: they deny that complain ants operating expenses have largely increased and they deny that said ex- penses are greater In proportion to It's gross earnings. and they aver that said expenses are less in proportion to both gross and net earnings as hereinabove shown; and they deny that the fact that the classifications or rates, upon all or any articles fixed by complainant. or existing, may become unfair, unrea- sonable or unjust, at any time in the future. can or ought to be considered in determining the present validity or said act, or the reasonablfness and fairness of the rates fixed by the same; or that the possibility of said changes, has or ought to have any, effect upon the validity of said act. said rates or said classifications; and they deny the effect of said act as is stated in said paragraph. And defendants further answering said paragraph say: that they deny that said rates raised by complainant prior to said 9th. day or February. 1907, were raised by it. be-. cause the same were unreasonably low or because they were not then afford ing complainant sufficient compensa- tion for the transportation of the same !; and they aver that said rates on said articles, were raised by complainant. solely for the purpose Of anticipatlng g and evading the effect of said act, then on it's passage; that complainant oeing advised that said act was on it's pas sage, ana or US teTfuS Tdiseu saiu io.S'S In an effort to make the same by the operation of said act the. maximum rates to be-charged therefor. instead of the rates fixed by 1t, and then in force; and defendants aver that said rates would nor have been raised by com plainant but for said proposed legisla- ton .land they aver that many of the rates as raised by complainant were SO exorbitant that they were voiunta- . ra1 1at rate existing on said first day of Janu- ary on the same); and defendants fur ther aver that the Legislature of Ala bama learning of the intention of conn plainant, and said other railroads to so defeat the fair and reasonable purpose