The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1909-03-08
Decision Of Iudg Nc 2 Phersolf
FaYors Eighteen Rail
road Companies
CON FIsGAT n DRY
And Earnings Do Jot Furnish.
a Reasonable Profit on
the Investments


the Investments.
II 4 KANSAS CRY. No. March s,A
notable decision IA favor Of the raii-
roads was handed down today by
! Judge McPh Pherson of the United States
District court u the two cent fare and
1 maximum freig mt IA te eases involving
eighteen Missouri lines Tlle railroaas
contended that the rates fxeo by the
statutes Of the State were not remuns
eratiye but eonfiscatory. and that TIN
enforcement Of the statutes be on,
Joined, The State brought proceed.
ings TO have them enfofced
THE question said Judge Me-
Pherson in his decision, rs whether
the traffic wholly within the State 81
Eeedissonri generally referred to In the
evidence 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 reasona.
bic return after paying expenses upon
the Investment, oriwhether such traf-
fic is carried at a loss or less than suc!,
reasonable profit. The court has
reached the concl asion that upon this
question the statutory rates fxed by
either and both statutes are not re-
munerative.n
statute Is Invalid.
lin giving the reasons for such con-
clusions the decision says: THE un-
questioned and nndoubted rule IS that
there Is a, presumption both Of fact
and of law in favor Of the validity OF
every legislative enactment The rail-
way companies have the burden of:re-
moving this presumption and showing
that the statute clearly as some courts
say. t,alpably. and others say; beyond
q reasonable doubt tlla thc statute ii
invalid. InSthese eases tile court .4las
recognized this rule. The authorities
.upon this question form long. and
unbroken line, with the single excep-
ton of the majority opinion in Tho
Pennsylvania case decided a yeilr AFRO.
(6s All. Rep. 67s.) And that one, au-
thorlty is not persuasive.
Refers 10 Gov. Hughes.
"All testimony and argument hear.
Ing upon tho question as 10 v,,at. co,,.
slderation tho legislature Of missouri
gave 10 these enactments. is sutter,s,
lmmatcrial. Much was saId In arg,,.
ment as 10 the message Of Govern 4.
Hugres. Of Now York. two vearv -,
IN 1cc1ining to approve tho two cant
fare statute Of that state. Coy.tnor
Hughes had the moral courage ~ ve,o
measure cf nop,,Iar favor l,eca,,se ].
he believed Tho question had not l,.e,s
fully considered. But. the ,p,attons j,
a governor 70 pronosed lep,s,ation, ! ~
those Of 4 court "a legislation cons,,n, !, i
mated are scntlre1y ,lifrerent
"Most Of Ia yn,en ana many Il ,S,,s,.s
hc1ievr that tho onestion g,s ,yI,ot,o :
| The railway companv as ! s,,sto,n, q
| enrnInr sutt,cient revenue mon tbe
vaIpe If Tho pronerty Of the svsten,
They believe thaf n tho Bnrlinpto,,5
Santa Fe. Wabash or any other rail-
| road system Is earning, sueb money d.
viii nav all charges and exnenses tn.
cInd,nr taxes and interest with roason.
able diylaends. 10 the stoclsbolders
Ma. statc rates for state b,,sincss
must stand or coure.no ono believe.
this who has giyen he allph,ost ~
ltcntton 10 the question. That nrecIse
Question was before. and was decided
Inv .I,,stice Brewe,. and at,,rmod III trc
snnreme court n the Nebrasla cass :. i.
| smith vs. Amos. The only a,,ost,on
| 4 ~ 10 Missouri rates loss exnsnss.
nroner1y charged against the saZ,a,
4 Ana II this balance does NOT ,leave 5s,,s.
ecient to pay a reasonable ret,,rn ~.
law d Invalid. md II t,,e railroaS ~ ,a !
system Of any company a a.rnIns
more than ! reasonable ret,,rn ~ q, ..' ,,sa.
| SON az interstate rates wbich assoc.
the people rhany times moro t,,s,,s s,o.s,
rates ana 4 such interstate @ ,a.ss 80
l Too hieh. Congress acting aioS,s =,
4 through a commission mus, r,,1,o 4,,o