The semi-weekly messenger., 1907-12-10
AN IMPORTANT CASE.

The case argued in the supreme |
court of the United States on We'd |
nesday is almost identical with the
case now pending in the federal
circuit court in this state, brought
by certain stockholders Of the At
lantic Coast Line against that COM
pany, the corporation commission
and the attorney general Of this
state, to prevent the enforcement of
the act of the legislature requiring
the railroads in North Carolina to
charge no higher rate than two and
a quarter cents per mile for passen-
ger fare.
The Coast Line case is now pend
ing in the circuit court, but by an
agreement between the parties that
road and the Southern, which had
brought a suit somewhat similar and
for the same purpose, have put on
the statutory rate. The case of the
Southern is brought by the railroad
corporation against the corporation
commission and the attorney general
of the state. Therein lies the diff
ference between these two cases.
The Minnesota case is similar, as
we said above, both in nature of
institution and parties defendant,
to the Coast Line case. The legis-
lature of that state passed a law
specifying intrastate rates on certain
classes of freight. Certain stockhold-
ers of the Northern Pacific road
brought suit in the federal court
against the railroad company, the
attorney general to prevent the en-
fOrcement of the law and an injunc-
tion was issued pending final hear
ing, enjoining the defendants against
carrying the law into effect. The at
torney general ignored the order of
the federal court judge and brought
suit in the state court against the
railroad, and for doing so was cited
before him in contempt proceedings
and, after a hearing, was adjudged
in contempt of that court and fined.
He refused to pay the fine and was
ordered into custody. He then sued
out a writ of habeas corpus before
the supreme court Of the United
States. 1t is the argument on this
writ which was had in that court
Wednesday.
In this manner the question of the
right of federal courts to issue in
functions against the execution of a
state law by officials of that state
is brought directly before the court
of last resort and without all the de-
lay incident to the trial Of such
case on it's pleadings and testimony
as to facts.
That courts decision on the ha-
beas corpus petition of the Mime
sofa attorney general will establish
the federal government and of the
states on such questions, and for
this reason the attention of the
whole country, especially Of those
states where there has recently been
railway legislation, is centered on
this case, and the decision Of the
court is anxiously awaited.
1t may be that there are points of
difference between the Minnesota |
case and that of the Atlantic Coast |
Line which will not necessarily make |
the latter stand or fall by the de- !
cisiOn in the other.
AS this Minnesota case involves a |
constitutional question of so much |
Importance to many states and af-
fects the interests of numerous rail- !
roads with millions of dollars in !;
vested in them by stockholders the |
court will be inclined to decide the
question raised as early as possible /
The whole country is anxious for a |
speedy settlement of this question.
Senator Foraker's friends do not |
admit that Mr.. Taft has a walkover |
in Ohio. They are going to give him |
a tussle for the state delegation in |
the convention. If the latter gets !
it that will by no means insure him |
the nomination.