The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-07-30
Southern Lines Fire a Warm
Parting Shot.
File Additional Petitions With
United States Court.
THEY WERE COERCED.
Make This Claim and Judge
Pritchard Has Another Say.
Other Items Of Interest to
Railway People.

Asheville, n. c., July 30.-A part
ing shot at the state authorities in the
railroad controversy was fired through
petitions which the Southern railway
and the Atlantic Coast Line filed be-
fore Judge Pritchard yesterday asking
that his interlocutory Injunction be
modified in accordance with the peace
agreement reached Saturday at
Raleigh between Governor Glenn and
the railroads. Both roads filed petit
tons very similar in tenor, which ex-
planned a conference here yesterday
between attorneys representing the
two roads. The petition of the South
ern railway recites the entire history
Of the railroad cases and includes
protest against what the roads regard
as their i'll treatment, this protest and
recital of facts being designed for the
peruSal of the supreme court of the
United States as well as for the public.
The railroads declare, in effect, that
they were dubbed into becoming
party to the agreement effected at
Raleigh. The public mind had been
inf1amed by the newspapers and the
utterances of politicians and the
agreement was only assented to, it is
asserted, under duress. because of
threats of an extra session of the leg
islature when the expectation was
held out that worse things would
happen to the roads. The Southern
company, says the petitioner, was
confronted with a question as to
whether proper sense of it's duty to
the peace and good order of the state,
Il proper consideration of it's obliga-
lions to perform it's duties as a COM
mon carrier in the state and inter-
state business and its obligation not to
subject its employees to harassing
prosecutions, arrests and imprison-
ment would justify it in longer claim
ing its constitutional right to the pro-
lection of introductory order author
fzing it to continue, until the hearing,
its existing rate of passenger charges,
or whether it was not best to cease
the unequal conflict with the united
powers of the state. The Southern
does not lose sight, continues the petit
ton, of the momentous nature of the
claims asserted by the state. If the
states claim can be sustained, 1t is
pointed out. 1t means that through the
agency of its criminal laws, a state
can take the use of property without
compensation for the. time between
the enactment of a statute by it's gem
eral assembly and the final. determine
ton of its constitutionality. If this
claim of the state be upheld, state
the company were compelled to OBJ
serve this low rate. Notwithstanding
the fourteenth amendment forbids it,
the state has the power to take DUR
ing the period mentioned the property
of a company without compensat ton.
With reference to the Coercion and
intimidation" employed to drive the
from the courts, to the ex-
tent mentioned, special mention is
made of the activity of Governor
Glenn against the roads. In fact, the
statement is made that the governor
directed a ms c11r
The request to make the changes
indicated in the petition was granted
by Judge Pritchard, who. in making
the revised order. made a lengthy
statement saying that the application
cow made to modify the injunction
heretofore granted in these causes
present a condition of affairs I'M
in the judicial annals of
this country"
THE effect of the order restraining
the corporation commission OF North
Carolina, ct al" said Judge Pritchard
was to preserve the rights of the par
ties until the masters to whom this
cause has been referred could have an
opportunity to report the facts and
thereby enable the court to correctly
determine whether the act in question is
In order to protect the
public the compliments were
to give ample bond and securi-
ty to secure the payment into the regis
lerS OF the court a sum SuII1c1enC TO pay
the difference of the present rate and
The proposed rate to those who might in
the meantime purchase tickets.
1.-The defendants could have appealed
but they feared to do so. Instead of ap-
pealing in these cases, they filed an an
,wer and the causes were then and there
referred to a master in order that the
evidence might be taken.
TT is Just to say the question of
states rights is involved in this contro-
versy. 1t is equally unjust TO insist thai
what the court has done in the premises
was an interference on the part of the
federal court with the state courts. How
ever, on the other hand. there has been
a manifest disposition on the part of the
state officials to interfere with the fed
eral court in its procedure to do equal
Justice between the complainants and
the defendants and in the exercise of
these powers necessarily incident to the
protection of it's jurisdiction. If this kind
of obstruction should prevail and citi-
zens are thus to be denied the rights
them by the constitution of
the United States, then those provisions