The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-08-28
INCREASES LEFT TILL
 WHOLE CASE IS SETTLED
Raises by Railroad Before Law Was
 Passed Are Nullified.
Judge Jones Hold. That as Proof Left AdvisabiIity of Raises fin Doubt, Rates of January list Must Be
 Made Affective, Pending
 Final Determination.

Judge Thomas (. Jones of the United States Court yesterday handed down a decision on the motion for a pre- liminary injunction against the Rail- road Commission, in living feature of the maximum freight rate bill. in favor of the State. This motion has been heie up taking testimony as to nIneteen articles. the rates on which were raised by the South and North Alabama Railroad Company. and twen- ty-nine articles on which the rates were raised by the Louisville and Nash vilIe Railroad Company. between January i, 1907, and the approval of the bill, which fixes the freight rate on January 1. 1907,~as the maximum rate.
 The court held that both the roads were entitled to preliminary tnJunc- tions. which would be to allow them the rates in force on January 1. 1907, but he directed that after September 30. the old rates existing, January. 1907. be restored.
 These raises related to building material For furnaces, and the proof left 1t in doubt whether those raises were proper, to remove the inequali- ties between persons in different zones or groups in the mineral region upon which said rates were based.
 Leave was given to any community or person interested to apply for special increase to any individual rates. where 1t was necessary to prevent in- euualities.
 The ,refunding bono ~f the Louisville and Nashville Railroad was fixed at s800,00o, and that Of the South and North Alabama Railroad at $150.00o. both of which were promptly furnished.
 The opinion contains come interest ing discussion of the power of the Legislature to compel a carrier to dis eliminate.
 This is the case in which Judge Jones heard MT. Compton. Traffic Manager of the Louisville and Nash willie Pailfoad Ccfnpany, ard Mir 1Aelts nedy. Secretary of the Railroad scem- mission, as to the facts involved. great deal of evidence was offered.
 The result Is that the right to make the increase is finally to depend upon the proof when the whole case is passed upon, but in tLe meantime. the old ana lower rates, are to be restored Septem- Der 30.
 The opinion is in full as roiofws:
 Tn the Circuit Court of the United States, for the Middle District of Ala bana-
 "LouisvilIe and Nashville Railroad Company ct al vs. Railroad Commission of Alabama. eft al
 Jones, District Judge.
 This cause was submitted some time ago, on motion for a preliminary injunction against the defendants to the original bill filed herein. At that tIme,s counsel for respondents did not resist the preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the stat utes, fixing the rates for the carriage of passengers and certain articles of freight, mentioned in what IS Known as the commodity rate bill, or the en- forcement of the statute which for feited the right of complainants to do iptra-state business because they filed suit in this court.
 Respondents did resist, however, any injunction protecting complainants in the use of rates which had been raised between January 1, 1907, and February 9, 1907, the date of approval of the act. which made the freight rates in force on January 1, 1907. the maximum rates thereafter. The effect of this legislation, taken in connec- tion with the other acts, was to make the rates in force on January l. 1907, the maximum rates, except wherein they were lowered, as fixed in what is known as the commodity rate stat ute.
 since that matter was submitted on motion for preliminary injunction, the respondents have filed an unsworn an- swer to the original bill. It sufflees to say of the answer, so far as ma terial to this hearing, that it is main ly mere traverse of the allegations of the original bill, statement of facts and arguments to meet an elaborate statement of facts brought forward in the same way in the bill.
 Outside of a general denial, the only new matter brought forward by the answer is, that, in consequence of the statute forbidding free passes, of which complainant was in the habit of giv- ing large number. the reduced pas senger rate would produce as much tn- come as compIainants received under the three cent rate, and that the suit is a suit against the State.
 That this is not a suit against hte State is now beyond the pale of con troversy. having been settled by num- erous and repeated decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. Reagan vs. Trust Company. 154 U. s. 362; Smith vs. Ames, 169 U. S. 466; Prout vs. Starr. 1SS U. S. 537;l Mis- sissippi Railroad Commission vs Illi- nois Central Railroad Company, 20S U. s. 341.
 The Increased Rates.
 The court finds on examination of the rates increased above those in force on January 1, 1907. that nineteen of such increases were made by the South and North Alabama Railroad Company and twenty-nine by the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company. These rates relate altogether to transports tion of building and construction ma terial to the coal and ore mines. and from stone quarries, and to material such as coal. iron ore, limestone, etc. for furnaces, and on shipments of pig iron between points in the mineral dis trict.
 ''They were fixed upon the principle of what are known as zone or group rates. The court entered upon a la borious examination as to the reasona- bleness of each of these rates. and the justice of the principles upon which they were adjusted. It has also had