Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1909-05-08
HEPBURN ACT
IS UPHELD
New Construction Placed Upon
Commodities Clause.
POINTS FOR THE RAILROADS

Under Decision Of United States Su-
prere Court Anthracite Roads May
Transport Coal If Sold to Somebody
EIse-May Hold Stock In Coal Com
panies.
washington, May At has been
many a day since a decision of the
supreme court of the United States
has been received with SO much In
terest as was manifested in the de-
cision of that court in what are known
a. the commodities clause" cases.
affecting the anthracite coal carrying
railroads. These cases had been de-
cided by the United States circuit
court for the eastern district of Penn
sylvania favorably to the railroads in
that the clause of the Hepburn rate
law, which prohibits interstate rail-
roads from carrying commodities
manufactured, mined or produced d.
rectly or indirectly by the roads, was
declared unconstitutional, and the
general impression had been that the
decision would be affirmed by the SUI
preme court When, therefore, there
was a. reversal instead of an affirma-
ton, the interest was much magnified.
When again 1t was found that the re-
versal was based on technical grounds
able to the railroads, sentiment took
another turn, and those who had been
anxiously awaiting the announcement
Of the result found themselves much
puzzled.
Justice Whites Decision.
Analysed, Justice Whites decision
is that congress did not transcend its
constitutional authority In the enact
ment Of the commodities provision,
but on the other hand 1t was held that
the governments construction OF the
provision had been entirely too COM
prehensive. AS construed by the court,
the sole object of the clause Is to pre-
vent carriers from being associated
In interest with the commodities trans
ported at the time Of transportation,
hence that the law only prohibits the
transportation of articles when they
have been produced by railway COM
Ehuy, Which, has HUI III HOOQ Adltu
parted with them, when the company
owns or controls, the commodity to be
transported, and when the company
has an interest direct or indirect in
the commodity in legal sense. 1t
was especially held, however, that the
prohibition does not apply to the own
ership of stock in a producing COM
pany, but that a carrier may own stock
In such a company and at the same
time transport the product Of that
company.
Railroads Can Evade the Law.
Summed up, the act only compels
companies to disassociate themselves
from the products they carry. 1t thus
appears, first, that the commodities
clause is vital and operative statute
with respect to all products, such as
coal which the railroad companies
actually own at the time of transpor-
tation, and that the railroads must
sell such products to somebody else
before they can lawfully ship them,
and second, that unless the act is
promptly amended so as to include
stock ownership the railroads can es.
cape the law entirely by converting
their direct ownership of coal proper
ties into stock ownership by the or
ganization of subsidiary coal COM
panies.
The effect of the decision under ex-
listing conditions is favorable to the
railroads and the government lost on
practically all points except in the sus-
tentation of the principle involved