Hattiesburg daily news. (Hattiesburg, Miss.) 1907-1908, 1907-06-12
SUPREME COURT DECISION
in The FAMOUS RATE CASE
American Lumbernan Thinks Those Who Make
Exceptions to 0vercharges Must Lose
Their Claims.

/ could come into court at this time and
substantiate complaint relative to
the unreasonable charge for carrying
lumber. The present rates have been
! in effect over four years and because
of the absence Of complaint it might
be held they we're regarded as just
and reasonable charges. This is the
presumption arising from the fact that
they had been paid without protest.
Parties to suits brought against
the railroad companies have fully pro
tected their interests. 1t is the ship
per or buyer on an +. o. b. basis, opers
ating East Of the Mississippi, who has
difficulty in determining definitely Just
what course to pursue.
No provision is made nthe Federal
laws nor under the interstate com
merce act under. which these suits
were brought covering such matters OF
Mitigation as this. 1t is the opinion of
attorneys who investigated the sub
Iject that suit must be brought under
State laws Many of the States have
statutes of limitation bearing upon
matters OF this sort and those of the
Estate in which suit is brought must
govern the right to recover.
THE statutes of limitation vary, II
linois for instance providing two years
in which suit for recovery in cases Of
this kind may be brought 1t is held
by the Illinois statutes that suit to
recover back discriminatory rate Is
a suit to recover money paid and mvst
be brought within two years time Of
the date Of transaction at issue.
"The decision in the case os the
Chicago, burlington & Quincy railroad
" Jones. Illinois Reporter, page JG4.
confirms rle foregoing statement An
other case OF interest which has q de-
cided irar.ng upon possible litigation
along this line is that of Parsons vs.
the carriers; 1877 Federal Reporter
la. IN this case it is held that the in
terstate commerce act is a penai stat
ute and that suits by shippers there
sander afS suits % recovsr penalt'rs
II IN c4ae y Ratican ~ rer1ninal
lesa< 4 fssoeiatien It was hcla laas
much ~ Tire Interstate commerce act
its>lf prescribed no time upon which
actions hereunder must be Instituted,
that therefore such actions must be
governed by the limitations OF the
statute OF the State in which they are
!, brougt In Missouri shippers would
have three years in which to bring
] suit, in Louisiana, under the civil
il code, they would have one year
THE law also recognizes whether
or not charlie is paid voluntarily or
under protest 1t is presumed OF
I course that lllmbermen voluntarily
4 paid their freight bills during the last
!. four years. Owing to the nature Of
the transaction, however, the court
!, might recognize the fact whether OIL
!, not payment was made voluntarily
& With respect ia all future payments or
! / lTSiSHb OIlStutttihS III lily koOutu the
Z himbermen can protect themselves e.
! rendering the full amont Of the freight
bill less the differences OF 2 cents &
hundred pounds. and in the event sucl
!. tender is refused can have their pro
!, test noted by the local agent and re
serve all legal rights. 1t is naturally
i as hard to define case where freigh
lis paid with or without protest as it,
:, to define a reasonable doubt but will
= a view to protecting their own inter
Z ests in the future every payment 0
Z freight-let it be repeated on lum
! Der originating South Of the Ohio rive
), and East of the Mississippi rive
/. should be made under protest.
! "The courts have held in a humble
of cases that where excessive rates ar
] paid voluntarily the shipper is estoI
I ped from recovering. Fro this reaso
7 when freight is paid an endeayo
should be made to show that the raj
! road would not deliver the car unles
= the charges assessed were liquidated
If {. r. DaughdriIl 4 CO., have tn
-. t.~..<. .<<,.. ,.san< for Z ala ~ rax<