The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1908-11-07
COMMISSION RATE
HELLO UP BY COURT
Missouri River Rate Case Has
Been Enjoined
GROSSCUP EXPLAINS BILL
Railroads In Their Suit Alleged That
the Ruling of the Commission Is
Equivalent to Government
Ownership.
GROSSCUP EXPLAINS BILL

Chicago, November 6.-Judges Grosscup,
Seaman and Baker, I'm the United States
| circuit court today granted temporary
injunction restraining the interstate COM
| merce commission from carrying into eff
| feet its order on what is known as the
| Missouri river rate case" The court did
not go into the merits of the law in the
| case but stated that a temporary order
would issue inasmuch as no injustice
would be done by allowing the old rate to
continue until the matter Is finally adj
Indicated. Judge Grosscup suggested that
the lawyers endeavor to agree on a state
ment of facts which would be presented
without loss of time to the supreme court.
The ruling of the interstate commerce
commission requiring lower rates between
Mississippi and Missouri points on ship
ments originating east of Pittsburg and
Buffalo than on those originating west
of the cities named was alleged by the
railroads which entered suit for an in
junction to be revolutionary. The ruling.
it was declared. if allowed to stand would
fix principle tantamount to government
ownership of the roads. The judges took
the case under advisement October 80.
Judge Grosscup in delivering the ruling
of the court said:
only one feature of the bill, in the
opinion of the court, need be spoken of
at this time. That feature grows out
of the fact that under the order of the
interstate commerce commission a rate of
8 cents less was given on hrst-class and
other classes of freight proportionately
to traffic from the Atlantic seaboard to
the Missouri river points than was given
to traffic originating at intermediate
points. The bill of complaint cites the
opinion of the commission which frankly
and clearly shows that a differential of
8 cents was created. To make the reduc-
ton universal in place of differential
woulu put the eastern cities on an equality
with the Missouri river cities. Whether
the bill and the answer and the opinion
of the court satisfactorily show this con-
dition is not the question considered or
attempted to be passed on now. The
question which the court is concerned
with is: Has prima facie case been
made out authorizing the court to enter
the interlocutory order prayed for? The
rules of the interstate commerce commits
sion are authorized on the ground that
they would prevent undue discrimination.
The sole point to be considered now is:
What is undue discrimination? Discrim-
ination is admitted Is it due or undue2
Many points are involved in determining
this question, but the court holds that
sufficient is shown in the bill to require
us TO grant the interlocutory order. In
the first place, there has grown up on
the basis of the old rate the commerce
of the country. We cannot overlook that.
Trade houses have undoubtedly grown up
under the conditions giving them the same
relative rates from intermediate points to
the west as from the Atlantic coast. The
rule of the commission disturbs CONNER
cial conditions which have grown up for
years on a basis of the present rates,
which is sufficient to warrant the court
in issuing a restraining order until the
case is finally presented.
1T may be that the parties to this pro-
ceeding can agree on the facts SO that the
case may go to the supreme court on a
final record, and not on the interlocutory
order, and be judicially determined within
a short time
Leave was granted to other railroads so
wishing to intervene In the case.