The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1909-05-04
RAILROADS WIN
VICTORY BEFORE
SUPREME COURT
Continued from Page I.


The following is a summary of the
opinion in the commodities cases;
Il The claim Of the government that
the provision contained in the Hepburn
act approved June %. 1906 commonly
called the commodities clause. prohibits
a railroad company from moving COM
mOdities in interstate commerce because
the company has manufactured. mined
or produced them. or owned them IN
whole or in part or has had an interest
direct or indirect in them. wholly ire
spective of the relation or connection OF
the carrier with the commodities at the
time of the transportation. is decided
to be untenable. 1t is also decided that
the provision OF the commodities clause
relating to interest direct or indirect,
does not embrace an interest which
carrier may have in a producing cor
poration as the result Of the ownership
by the carrier Of stock in such corpora
ton irrespective Of the amount of stock
which the carrier may own in such cor
poration, provided the corporation has
been organized in good faith.
p Rejecting the construction placed
by the government upon the commodi-
ties clause, It is decided that that clause
when all its provisions are harmonious
ly construed has solely for its object
10 prevent GEEEltlS EnEdStu III ittNNA DNc y
commerce from being associated in in
terest with the transportation with the
commodities transported, and therefore
the commodities clause only prohibits
railroad companies engaged in inter
state commerce from transporting such
commerce commodities under the fol-
lowing circumstances and conditions.
Construction of Clause.
"(aJ When the commodity has been
manufactured, mined or produced by a
railway company or under its authority
and at the time Of transportation the
railway company has not in good faith
before the act of transporta ton passed
with its interest in such commodity;
fbG when the railway company owns
the commodity to be transported in
whole OF in part: (c). when the railway
company at the time Of the transpOrta-
ton has interest direct or indirect I'm q
/ legal sense in the commodity, which last
provision does not apply to the COM
moC[y manufactured, mined, produced.
o(ned. etc, by corporation because
a railway company is a stakeholder i'm
such corporation. Such ownership of
stock in a producing company by q rail-
way company does not cause it as the
owner Of the stock to have a legal in
! terest in the commodity manufactured,
etc. by the producing corporation.
80 As thus construed the Commodi-
ties clause is a regulation Of commerce
within the power of congress to enact.
! The contentious deliberately argued for
the railroad companies. that the clause
/ if applied to pre-eXisting rights Will Op-
crate TO take property of railroad COM
panies and therefore violate the due
/ process clause Of the fifth amendment.
/ al h. 10 a. IN q 2
/ the clause prohibited and restricted in
accordance with the construction which
[ the government gave that clause and
for the purpose Of enforcing which pro-
/ hibitious these suits were brought
/ As the construction the government
/ placed upon the act and seeks to ell
/ force is now held to be UnsOund and as
none of the contentious relied upon are
applicable to the act as now construed
because under such construction the
act merely enfOrces a regulation Of COM
n1erce by which carriers are compelled
to dissociate themselves from the pro-
ducts which they carry and does not
prohibit where the carry is not asso-
ciated with the commodity carried. it
follows that the contentious on the sub
/ ject of the fifth amendment are with
out merit.
r. The exemption as to timber etc.
contained in the clause is not Tepug-
nant to The constitution.
.. The provision adopted as TO pen
alties is separated from the other pro-
visions of the act. As no recovery Of
penalties was prayed for. no issue con-
corning them is hereby presented. II
viii be time enough TO consider whether
the right to recover penalties exists
when an attempt to collect penalties is
made.
g. As the construction now given
the act differs so widely from the con-
struction which the government gave to
the act and which il was the purpose Of
these suits TO enforce. it is held that it
is not necessary, in reversing and re-
handing, to direct the character of de-
crees which shall be entered. but simply
to reverse and remand the case with
directions to enforce and apply the stat
ute as il is now construed.
-. As the Delaware & Hudson com
pany is engaged as a common carrier
by rail, i'm the transportation of coal
in the channels of interstate commerce
II is a railroad company within the pur-
view Of the commodities clause and is
subject TO the provisions of that clause
as they are now construed"
Kee Lox Ribbons and Carbon.