Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1909-03-09

Jefferson City, Mo-, March s.
Gov. Hadley did not appear sur
prised when informed the two
cent passenger fare law had been
knocked out by Judge Mcpherson.
All | can say at this time,"
said the governor, is that the de-
cision is not correct one. The
state will surely appeal to the
United States supreme court"
Topeka, March s. The sen.
ate committee on railroads today
submitted an adverse report on
the two-ctnt fare bill which had
already passed he house. This
came Immediately upon receipt Of
the news Of the decision Of Judge
Mcpherson holding the Missouri
two-cent fare law unconstitution-
al,
Kansas City, Mo-, March s.--A not {
able decision Is favor of the railroads 4
was handed down today by Judge Mo-
Pherson, Of the United States district
court, in the two cent fare and max-l
imum freight rate cases, involving
eighteen Missouri lines The railroads.
contended that the rates fixed by the
statutes of the state were not remun-
eratiye but conflscatory, and that the
enforcement Of the. statutes be en-
joined. The state brought proceedings
to have them enforced.
"The question:" said Judge McPher-
son In his decision, "is whether the
traffic wholly within the State Of Mis-
souri, generally referred to In the evi-s
dence as local traffic, can be carried
| under the freight rate statute OF 1907
and the passenger fare statute of 1907
at such profit as will give a reason
| able return after paying expenses up
on the investment, OF whether such
| traffic is carried at a loss or less than
such reasonable profit. The court has
reached the conclusion that upon this
| question the statutory rates fixed byI
either and both statutes are not re-1
munerative.''
Recalls Gov. Hughes Veto.
/ In giving the reasons for such COM
clusions the decision says: THE un-.
questioned and undoubted rule Is that.
there is presumption both OF fact
and of law In favor OF the validity OF
every legislative enactment. The rail-
way companies have the burden of rel
moving this presumption, and showing
! that the statute clearly, or as some.
courts say, palpably, and others say,
beyond reasonable doubt, that the,
! statute Is invalid. In these cases the
court has recognized this rule. The
authorities upon this question form g.
long and unbroken line, with the SIM
gle exception of the majority opinion'
In the Pennsylvania case decided al
year ago. (68 Att. Rep 676). And that
one authority Is not persuasive.
Cali testimony and argument bear
ing upon the question as to what con.
sideratton the legislature of Missouri
gave to these enactments, is utterly
immaterial. Much was said In argu-
ment as to the message of Governos
Hughes. Of New York two years ago
In declining to approve the two cent
statute OF that state. Governor
Hughes had the moral courage to veto
measure Of popular favor because as
he believed the question had not been
fully considered. But the relations Of
a governor to proposed legislation and
those Of the court to Legislation con.
summated are entirely different.
State Business Only Basia.
|
Most of laymen and many lawyers
believe that the question Is whether
the railway company as system is
earning sufficient revenue upon the
value Of the property of the system.
They believe that IL the Burlington,
, Santa Fe, Wabash OF any other rail-
, road system Is earning such money as
!. will pay all charges and expenses in.
cluding taxes and interest, with rea-
sonable dividends, to the stockholders,
, that state rates for state business
! must stand. or course no one be.
} lieves this who has given the slightest
}, attention to the question That pre-,
else question was before, and was de,
cided by, Justice Brewer, and af
firmed by the supreme court In the
Nebraska case of Smyth vs. Ames. The
: only question is as to Missouri rates,
!, less expenses properly charged
, against the same. And If this balance
4 does not leave sufficient to pay rea-