The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-03-10
Injunction Against Putting New
Rates in Effect.
APPLYFOR INJUNCTION
Claim That Means Reduction OF
20 to 25 Per Cent.
Asserted That New Rates Are
COnfiscat0ry.

ed to the United States circuit cour
for a restraining order enjoining the
Kansas state board of railroad com
rnissioners, @. w. Kanaval, c. A. Ry-
ker and 3. J. Ryan. who compose the
board, G. T. Grattan, attorney for the
board and E. S. Jackson, attorney gen
eral of Kansas, from placing into er-
feet on April 1, the schedule Of maxi
mum freight rates on classes, commodl-
ties, tobbers and differential rates the
orders for which was entered by the
board on February IA, 1908.
1t is claimed that the new schedule
will cause a reduction in the presen'
freight tariffs of from 20 to 20 per cent
The railroads which have filed SUI
already are: Santa Fe; Rock Island
Missouri Pacific; Union Pac1fc; Bur
lington; Missouri, Kansas q Iexas' 81
Louis & San Francisco; Topeka q
Northwestern; Leavenworth q Topeka;
I.eayenWorth, Kansas & Western; Kan
sas Southw estern. The Orient and st
Joseph and Grand Island railroads are
expected to file their petitions later
The applications for an injunction as
submitted by the railroads vary con-
siderably in their content, though the
main contention established by all Oh
the roads is that the rates proposed are
confiscatory and that they VIII resul'
in effecting a reduction In the inter
state rates. In d VI lAAO PO|A
tions the railroads simply confine them
selves to the claim that the rates are
confiscatory; in others the constitution
ality of the board is attacked.
The Union Paicfic asks for an inJunc-
ton not only against the board of rail-
road commissioners, it's attorney and
the attorney general but also against
the various county attorneys OF ths
state and all persons who snip any OF
the commodities described in the pro-
posed schedules.
Grand Stand Charges.
w r. Smith. general attorney for
the Santa Fe. in his petition as coun-
sci for the Leavenworth and topeka
part of the Santa Fe system, states
that the board is attempting TO grand
stand by reducing the freight rates
He saws without mincing his words:
The said board of railroad COM
naissioners for the purpose OF pander-
ing to popular prejudice and furtner-
ing the personal interests of certain
persons for election to office con-
ceived the idea of making sweeping
and extravagant reductions in all the
rates charged by all the railroads for
the transportation of freight within
the state of Kansas, and without any
knowledge upon the subject and WITH
ont any complaint before them as 10
the nreasonableness OF any rate en-.
gagged the services of ]. G. Lincoln OF
St Louis an ex-employe OF the Mis-
souri, Pacific freight department. to
make up a new schedule which was
adopted"
In his petition for the Santa Fe
railroad this paragraph does not ap-
pear. though in all other respects the
two petitions are similar. The petit
ton of the Union Pacific railroad
which outlines the salient points OF
all of the other petitions follows in
part:
order of the board of railroad COM
missioners fixing the schedules of
freight rates and jobbers rates as
aforesaid, as well as said schedules
are unjust, oppressive, unlaWful, dls-
criminative and conf1s and
alleges upon information and belief
that If the rates prescribed by said
board are put into effect and main
tanned it will compel your orator to
transact its business. done wholly
within the state of Kansas at loss
and without permitting it to earn
reasonable or just income or rate of
interest upon the value of the prop
<rtv owned by 1t within the state of
Kansas and necessary for the purpose
of conducting its business as COM
mon carrier therein; that for reasons
hereinafter stated. it will also cause
a large and material reduction in it's
earnings on interstate business.
your orator alleges that If said
rates are enforced 1t will be compelled
to part with it's property without due
1,rccess of law, and that the ENFORCE
ment of said rates by said board will
be in conflict with the fourteenth
amendment to the constitution of the
United States.
Your orator alleges that the city of
Kansas City, Mo-. lies alongside of and
adjacent to the city of Kansas City,
Kan. and that the freight yards and
terminal facilities of your orator at
Kansas City extend across the state
lire and reach from the state of Kan
sas to the state of Missouri; that the
service performed in carrying freight
from points in Kansas to Kansas City
Is substantially the same whether de-
livery thereof be made in Kansas City,
Mo-. or Kansas City. Kan, and the
rates charged are the same; and your
orator submits that if 1t makes a 90
per cent reduction or any other sub
etanttal reduction in its rates from
points In Kansas to Kansas City, Kan.
without making similar reduction to
Kansas City, Mo-, that it will be vio-
latfn9 the laws of congress which pro-
hfbft an undue or unreasonable prefer
ence to any particular person, COM
pany firm, corporation or locality and
which prohibit any undue or unreason-
any particular person, company, firm,
corporation or locality; and which also
declare that no common carrier shall
charge any person greater compen-
sation for any service rendered than it
charges any other person for a like
and contemporaneous service in the
transportation of a like kind of traffic
under substantially similar circum-
stances and conditions.
''And your orator AYERS that sub
stantially the same conditions prevail
at many of the railroad gateways of
Kansas, located upon the borders of
the atate as at Kansas City, and that
the determinations which would exist
against cities located upon the borders