Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1908-07-15
JUDGE C. C. K0HLSAAT HOLDS
Decision in Test Case Brought to-
Prevent Carrying Out OF Con-
tract With Munsey & Co.
To Sanction Dickering Would Be to
Allow Passenger Rates to Rest on
The Whim OF the Carrier.

Chicago. July 15.-"ff 1t be lawful
20 make the exchange Of railroad
transportation for advertising, then it
would be lawful to do the same in
every transaction and the railroad
business might lawfully become one OF
barter and sale, limited only by the
demand
In a decision handed down today
ny Judge G., G. Kohlsaat in the Unit
ed states circuit court from which the
above Is quoted, the iurist enioined
the issuance of transportation bv the
Chicago. indianapolis & Louisville
Hallway company 10 the publishers OF
Munsey's Magazine In exchange for
advertising. The decision was RENDER
ed in test case in which the authors
tiles brought suit to prevent the car
rNing out of contract entered mo
in January. 1901 between the railroad
company and Frank A. Munsey e.
Company, providing for the issuance
of trip tickets or mileage To the value
OF $500. in consideration of certain
advertising space in the publication of
the magazine company. The contract
was alleged to be a violation of the
Hepburn law.
WHAT is CHAGED.
The petition charges that the ac-
ing such transportation constitutes a
violation OF prohibition against the
acceptance OF any compensation for
transportation. GREATER or less or diff
ferent'' from that named in the pub
hshed rates. The railroad company
insisted that II received full money
value based on schedule rates for the
mileage or tickets issued, and denied
that 1t was committing a violation OF
the law.
In passing upon the question OF
comp nsation, the decision says;
VALUE OF ADVERTISING
"The question as to the value Of the
advertising Is a contested one. Man
ifestly there can be no liked price
placed upon IT, The number of copies
Issued, the character of rs stIpbscrb-
ers and many other questions enter the
estimate of its worth. II is. therefore
impossible 70 say what its cash value
is, except by comparison with other adj
vcrtising rates. 1t cannot be said that
the evidence Is conclusive or convincing
on this point. II 1t Is taken at its cash
valu" why should transportation be linz
tied as specified in the contract? If
the magazine is paying $500 10 the de-
PENDANT why does ii accept transporta-
ton both of less and different value
than 1t would accept II 1t bought its
ticket with money? 1t seems fair TO
conclude that either the advertising Is
Of less than cash value or the adver-
Users are grossly imposed upon by the
railroads"
After citing several decisions rem
iered in somewhat similar cases, Judge
kohlsaat says;
ut will be noted that the contract
does not require that the advertisement
muet be furnished before the transport
tation is given, There is no restriction
upon the part OF the advertiser 10 call
for his railroad tickets only so far as
earned. In the matter OF interest the
rate would he less and different from
that which is paid.
TREND OF LEGISLATION.
There is no MISLEADING the trend
Of the law making and constituting
powers. Every new step Is tending to-
ward a most rigid enforcement of the
rule that requires exact equality in
the matter of rates. When, by the
Hepburn act. the word different was
added TO the words greater or less. 1t
Is not unfair to assume that Congress
intended to make the law more ex-
plicit and more difficult TO eyade The
Intention tx TO close every avenue OF
discrimination, Bearing this in mind.
the courts have not been and viii
not he disposed to hesitate in giving
significance to changes in the Ian
guage OF the statutes as they occur
from time TO time II is essential to
tho spirit Of the statute that The value
NJ transportation be fixed and certain.
In no other way can It be held to be
exactly the same TO all. IL one person
may purchase II with ADVERTISING an
other with labor. aud another with
produce the value OF which Is n mat
ter OF agreement between the parties,
how can Il he said the schedule rate
ls always maintained? Would not the
rate rest IN the whm Of the carrier?
Such Is not the Intent of the law TO
say To one man You must pHy cash
and 10 his competitor, You must pay
in services or merchandise at prices
we may agree upan' be II less or
more than the market prices, would
seem clprly 10 constitute such diff
ference in transportation as condemns
ed by tho act Such claim Is made
that the governments contention
would exclude the use OF checks,
drafts and bills 81 exchange. This Is
without weight In practical business
usage these instruments pass for
cash The action OF the defendant IN
in dissonance with the letter and spirit
OF the interstate commerce Hct,'
Notice of an appeal 20 t5e United
States supreme court was az once
given by attonryes for the railroad
company