The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-03-30
FULL OPINION
 OF JUDGE JONES
tscontinued from Page Eixht.)


 tits on motion to dissolve. the motion
 hould be denied, and the injunction
 etained until the final hearing: M E2 Ency. s78, the ruie, is thus stateG. ESQ. where the dissolution would Mosx
 rreparapis ,n, injury so him tne than s it's coa~ would cause, the a,sad If Ire iniunction should be continueo.
 me continuance would work ho ntst,,s
 Puo. u @ tae h.junction will not be dis. s. E;olved.. Other authorities .rs sta.e are |rule thus: That where sn}s m /|suestions of doubt on the ae,s to
 (which additional iigns5 gsoys s deciding the .ishts of the parties, the disso 'us,on a oa
 srsstraining order should not Eranted. Indeed. this .,.. ,s .ne esneciaIly.
 ansuage srs Sf the fhs sIIsUtion IiIns10netion is not an
 nen, .i,er sorns other relief sought py Ehe action, but Is itself, the grinc1psi npsI Eelief desired, and a reiSh r,iS ha nro tanfo
 iminary injunction Wy for the time be-
 denial @attee or tar If compliment sue reeds on final decree. .4.a. h.- \ The law applicable 10 ano to con
 siementary, 1t only remains to con
 ns that action existing conditions
 aT for The wSole country at tnls E;ma is suffering from a severe oepres- Sion. of all kinds; partcsaray p.r,s ayyternrlses m
 mh,cs bas mas been fully lrefscted in its wnic anct mon transportation companies
 Their traffic has greatly falien on. Though there has peen ns Soned will sontinua. but the important fact can. not he lost sight of that the conditions nf ti,e railways, now, or, as tney may De reasonably expec,eG a 70 Ds faynrabie |p . when the original bills were fled h SSese cases. The carriers have be z Compelled by the. falling on or tne.r
 pushes tS cgrtsii nS to eSRTn dispense With the serviees of hundreds of faithful em- sployes. The volume of trade ana com mcrce and the general business of uis country has not yet recovered from the .6ack of confidence which was the cause of the currency panic. This is pres- 1idential year when there is always a dlspositic.a on the part of men to wat SbefoYe venturing into new business en- sterpffses.. Who can confidently say, In view of all these considerations. that a Reduction in the rates will produce smore business or granting snat s a, ., more than nter-bsis.nce the profit Tn Syoiume of business? Judgment Gas S1 Hthis must be largely speculative. and courts should be careful, Wnere tne lvolved. hvw they speculate as to the mode os protecting it. when an error 'of judgment may amount to practical lnew eI' rates are enforced pending final decree, the entire aggregate burden of lthe loss; although complainants may sfinally succeed, will be concentrated upon the carriers. and there IS no way Mn which they can save themselves .from heavy loss, except by pre- iventive remedies now. On the other hand, the parties from which the for 'mer rates are exacted, pendente lite. |are numerous. and the injury, even Though they lost the amount in each Individual case, would be comparative ny small to the amount of loss which would be inflicted on the carriers. Is |there any reason here, why a prelixn- Binary decree cannot be made, which Twill not subject either of the parties .fo any risk in the final outcome. what lever 1t may be, and will mete out to leach his exact right7 The court can 'do equity between the parties. fin such |a situation as this, at the present stage Of the litigation. by making an order (which absolutely protects the rights of both parties. It will, therefore make 'en order for the issue of a preliminary Injunction upon the carriers executing