The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-05-03
UPHOLOS THE LAW
Supreme Court OF the United
States Reyerses Decision
Oh the Court Below in COmmOd-
tiles Clause Case.
WITHIN IT'S POWERS
Holds That Congress Had q
Right to So Legislate.
Orders Enforcement Of Statute
as Now Construed.

washington, May 81 nat the CUM
modities clause" of the interstate COM
nerce act of 1906. known as the Hep
burn rate law, is constitutional was in
effect declared today by the supreme
court of the United States The de-
cision was announced by Justice White
The court reversed and remanded the
decision of the United States circuit
court, but the only directions were to
enforce and apply the statute as it is
now construed.
Briefly summarized the decision of
the supreme court in the commodities
clause cases holds the law to be con-
stitutional. but it does not concede the
contentious of the government as to its
scope. An especial examination was as
TO the ownership of stock in a different
corporation which it was held did not
constitute such ownership as would
prohibit transportation under the
terms of law. 1t was also held that
ownership of the commodity applied
only to the time of transportation. If
before transporting it the railroad COM
pany has in good faith parted with
commodity it may carry it. The prin-
cipal point of the decision was in rela-
tion to railroads holding the stock of
subordinate companies and on that
important point. the finding was favor
able to the roads
Justice Harlan dissented on the stock
feature. but otherwise the decision was
unanimous.
Summary of Opinion.
The following is a summary of the
opinion in the commodities cases:
1.-THE claim of the government that
the provision contained in the Hepburn
act approved June 29, 1906. commonly
called the commodities clause, prohibits
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 had had an inter-
est direct or indirect in them wholly
Irrespective of the relation or connec-
tion of the carrier with the commodi-
ties az the time of the transportation
Is decided to be untenabie. 1t is also
decided that the provision of the COM
modities clause relating to interest. d.
rect or indirect, does not embrace an
Interest which a carrier may have in a
producing corporation the result OF
the ownership by the carrier of stock
In such corporation irrespective of the
amount of stock which the carrier may
own in such corporation, provided the
corporation has been organized in good
faith"
''First-Retecting the construction
placed by the government upon the
commodities clause, it is decided that
that clause when all its provisions are
harmoniously construed has solely for
in interstate commerce from being as
sociated in interest at the time of
transportation with commodities
transported, and therefore the COM
modities clause only prohibits railroad
companies engaged in Interstate COM
merce from transporting such com
merce commodities under the follow
ing circumstances and conditions:
Specific Conditions.
"A"-When the commodity has
been manufactured, mined or pro-
duced by a railroad company or under
its authority and at the time of trans
portation the railroad company has
not in good faith before the act of
transportation, passed with its inter-
est in such commodity.
B" When the railway company
owns the commodity to be TRANSPORTED
4E whole or in part; when the railway
at the time of transportation has an
interest direct or indirect in a legal
sense in the commodity. which last pro-
hibtion does not apply to manufacture
ed. mined. produced. owned etc. by a
corporation, because a railway COM
pany is a stockholder in such corpora
tIon. Such ownership of stock is a
producing company by railway COM
the stock to have a legal interest in
the commodity manufactured etc by
the producing corporation.
'Third"-As this is construed. the
commerce within the power of congress
80 enact The contentious elaborately
argued for the railroad cor1pauies tba,
the caluse if applied to preexistine
rights will operate to take property oi
railroad companies and therefore yio-
late the due process clause of the fftt
amendment. were all based upon thf
assumption that the clause prohibited
and restricted in accordance with tn,
construction which the government,
gave that clause and for the purpos,
OF enforcing such prohibitions the suit,
were brought.
Held to Be Unsound.
LAS the construction which the
government placed upon the act and
seeks to enforce is now held TO he
unsound and as none of the con-
tentions relied upon are applicable
10 the act as now construed becaus,
under such construction the ac
merely enforces a regulation of tn,
commerce by which the carriers ar,
compelled to disassociate themselves
from the products which they carr,
and does not prohibit where tht
carrier is not associated with tn,
cOmmidity carried il follows tina
the contentious on the subject of tn,
fifth amendment are without merit.
"Fourth-The exemption as to tim.
Der, etc, contained in the clause |.
not repugnant to the constitution.
"Fifth-The provisions as to pen
alties is separable from he othel
provisions of the act. As no recover,
of penalties was prayed, no issue con
corning them is here presented /
will be time enough to conside
whether the right to recover penaltie
exists when an attempt to collec
penalties is made.
"Sixth-As the construction nov
given the act differs so widely from
the construction which fhe severn