The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-03-31
Judge Jones Issues Thirty Day Restraining Order to Pre-
 pare Arguments
SEVERAL MEASURES
 AFFECTED BY ORDER
Full Text of Judge Jones' Decision. Hearing on Motion of Com plainants Is Fixed for
 May 10. I8E

Montgomery, March O.-(Special.) 1.-The first setback to the rate and railroad regulation campaign that has been gong on even before the assembling Of the legislature was given today when Judge Thomas G. Jones of the United States court for the Middle and Northern DIS tricts of Alabama, sitting as judge Of the Fifth circuit, granted an order re- straining the operations of the laws Tor thirty days, during which time both sides are prepare and have ready to present arguments for and against permanent restraint as embodied in an order for in- junction.
 The laws that are reached in this ac- ton of Judge Jones are those which provide as follows: Making the rates that prevailed on January 1 last the maximum rates; classifying railroads and commodities and fixing the rates on llo articles of transportation; reducing the messenger fares from to 2la cents mile, and revocation of the license of any com pany that takes a suit from the state to the United States court or originates suit in the national tribunal Those laws other than the specific ones mentioned that operate to put any of the features of these bill into effect, are also re- strained.
 Those Who Argued.
 The arguments were made as follows. For the railroad Gregory l.. smith ot Mobile division counsel of the Louisville and Nashville, and Judge A. B. Andrews of Louisville, general counsel or the Southern for the state, former memDer ol the Supreme Court Richard w. Walker and former Chief Justice s. D. Weakley. The case of the state is in the hands of Attorney General A. NJ. Garber, who an- nolnced that the two gentlemen named would do the talking.
 Gen. George P. Harrison of the Western presented to the court Judges Humphrey of Louisville and l.. r. Parker of St. Louis, who had to be admitted to practice in the court. It also announced that the contentious of all the roads would be combined for the sake or d showing in the arguments of MT. Smith and Judge Humphrey.
 Judge Jones announced at the opening of the court that he had been informed informally that the state would not be ready and he was going to give them all the time needed to prepare their case. This was shown at once by the attorneys for the state, and the date one montn hence was agreed upon.
 Showing of Smith.
 Gregory l.. Smith, for the railroads, opened the argument, in which he ind- cated that by the present laws most of the railroads, at the lowest values pos sble, were earning only little over per cent and many of them not anything at all The railroads were willing to give the state all the time it wanted, but n- sisted that the court issue restraining order by which the officers of the state ho p=fo enforcing the acts Two of the bills carried pen alties for the violation of which the en- ployes of the company might be subjected to penitentiary sentence and to fine that might aggregate with some of the lines as much as a million dollars day. The roads might be subjected to penalties running more than s50,O0o a day in some cases.
 Mir. Smith followed this argument with excerpts from the railroad commission acts and other bills passed, whereby it was provided that in case any of the regulations were unreasonable or confis catory, or so adjudged. the rail lines would have access to relief by iniunctions and restraining orders. The rights of the state courts were no more than are guaranteed by the federal court, though the legislature might have tried to make it otherwise.
 Many cases were cited by MT. Smith to prove that he was right about this. He also said that the burden of proof was too great in the state courts. That the bookkeeping and record keeping were such as to make 1t practically impossible to meet them, hence relief was sought in the way pending.
 Judge Humphrey made the statement that the Southern railway would lose enormously if forced to do business un- der the new acts, that so far as his road was concerned the laws would cer- tainly be confiscatory, and he did not sec how it would be possible to do business under them The company had bought property in the state with the view that it would be given the same rights that other citizens enjoyed, had obeyed the laws of the state as it had found them, and the state is under obligation to give protection in the light of this implied con- tract.
 Judge Humphrey went over the laws that were objected to and argued that they would mean great loss to the roads and great inconvenience to the officers and employees To determine whether or not his contention was good he hoped the order restraining the state would be granted.
 For the State.
 Attorney General Garber stated that the state would be represented by Judges Weakley and Walker.
 Judge Walker opened by saying that tine state desired more time on not only an answer to the injunction, but on the question of restraining order as well.
 Granting all of the features of the re- sfraining desired by the roads, it would he thought. put the railroad commission out of business. He said no reason for suspending the maximum rate law had been presented. In general way no showing had been made that would jus tfv the order at this stage of the pro- ceedings. He assured the court that no
 ----------------~---~f~-
 lCONTINUED ON PAGE 7l