The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1908-03-27
CANNOT CONTROL
RATES ON WATER
Interstate. Commerce Commis-
sion Makes Important De-
sisn on l;selt.
-----.-
HOLD 5" POOL" is LEGA

Right OF Rail Lines to Make Traffic
Arrangements and Rates WITH
Steamship Companies. Can
Not &c Disputed
Washington. March 25.-A decision
has been promulgated by the Interstate
commerce commission in what prob
aD!y Is the most important case which
the commission Tor "a long time has
been called upon to determine. 1t is that
of the COSMOPOLITAN Shipping company,
Il philadelphia organization chartered
under the laws of New Jersey, against
the neutrality-suspicious. Packet COM
pany, the North German Lloyd Steam
ship company, the Wilson HulD lines
II the Observation-Disclosures lines.
The compliments petition was filed
with the commission nearly a year ago.
Some time subsequently the defend
ents filed 4 demurrer attacking the
jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce
commission. Oral arguments on the
demurrer We're heard by the commits
sion. Ward w. Pierson appearing for
the Cosmopolitan company and former
Senator John c. Spooner, Judge Will
lam G. Choa,e and Harrington Putnam
for the defendants. The oral argu-
ments We're followed by extensive briefs
which the commission has had under
consideration for several weeks.
The opinion In The case. which is
very voluminous. was prepared by
Commissioner Franklin X. Lane. 1t Is
an exhaustive discussion OF the law
bearing upon the case and a lucid state
rnent of the conclusions of the COM
mission.
Powers Affected.
IL decision is peculiarly important
l rYnt rlI-V f-,~ r. - : - CS~oy., Ir,,-> s-A
ests which hitherto have not been
brought before a judicial tribunal of
this country. but because lit affects ma
serially the over OF the Interstate
Commerce commission. In brief and in
effect, the commission decides against
Itself. 1t holds that it has no anfhori
~ over oceanic transportation and thus
determines the case adversely to the
contention of the complainant.
In this case the complainant alleged
that the defendant steamship cornpa-
MES transport traffic under through bills
Of lading inland points OF the
United States and foreign ports and are
thereby subjects 10 the jurisdiction OF
the commission; that n defendants
have made an arrangement for the
pooling Of eastbound export traffic
moving by rail to Atlantic ports and
thence by steamship lines to points In
Denmark, Sweden. Norway, Finland
and German points on the Baltic; that
\ VALID oo Shl1su poSA aI IL
determines the ultimate rates from
such inland points OF the United States
to such foreign ports via North Atlantic
ports; and that the neutrality-suspicious.
Packet company maintains a monopoly
of w%estbound and eastbound traffic for
warded on local and o N through bills Of
isding between Germany and other
continental countries and inland cities
of the United States.
Prayer of Petition.
The prayer OF the petition is that
the commission declare the Baltic
pool" to b an Illegal pooling of
freights under the interstate commerce
act, that the monopoly of the Ham
burg-American Packet company be de-
clared unlawful and that relief be
is q transatlantic steamship company
doing q freight business betYeen Amer
lean n continental ports.
To this complaint the defendants de-
INJURED, on the ground, first that the
commission has no jurisdiction of the
subject matter or power to proceed
against the defendants, and secondly,
that the complaint sets forth no mat
ter which is cognizable by the commits
sion or which it has been given author
tty TO remedy.
The commission sustains the dernur-
er and directs In an order that the
complaint be dismissed.
In effect the commission decides that
1t has no power to restrain, control or
regulate the practices of the trans-At-
lantic steamship lines which appear as
defendants III this case.
Commissioner Lane say that 1t is
clear, under a plain reading OF the in
terstate commerce act, that no basis ex-
mission has jurisdiction as to ship
ments from ports of the United States
to a foreign country not adjacent when
such shipments are not carried by rail.
or by rail and water from an inland
point of origin to a point Of trans
shipment. There may be an unlimited
volume Of all water commerce from
h American seaboard to the European
s~eaboard. but over such or
the carriers engaged therein the COM
mission has no regulating power what
eoever so long as the shipments orig
1nate at the seaboard and are not trans
shipped to the ocean carriers.
Don't Need to Publish.
Accordingly" continues Commission
er Lanes opinion, ut has been the uni
form Interpretation of the law that an
all water carrier engaged in carrying
freight originating at New York or New
Orleans may engage In such traffic be-
tween such ports without publishing its
rates with this commission. and so
ina the steamships plying between
Seattle n San Francisco, or the car
rter which transports freight from Du-
ANA " SittGtEO OA The great ldhCS, or
the river carrier from Memphis to New
Orleans; but If such water carriers are
controlled or managed by the same
corporation as controls a rail and water
line. or between q rail and water line
there Is an arrangement for continuous
carriage, then such water line becomes
subject to all the provisions mandatory
and prohib1rory of the oct to regulate
commerce.
The commission. not having been
given control over the ocean carriers,
cannot compel observance of the law
by such carriers, and IL they SO choose
they ma alter their rates at such times
as they please or for such patrons as
they please. Therefore the line must
be draw decisively between those car.
riers whose rates and practices this
commission car control and those
MILLIONAIRE TO
NAA0~ @@NR.~aa.~