The daily sentinel., 1910-03-04
LIVE STOCK
CASE BEFORE COURT
tContluuea RON rage ~

times 500, according to the outcome
of the litigation. The Baltimore &
Ohio Southwestern railroad alone ap-
pears in this case, but practically ev-
cry common carrier engaged in inter-
state commerce in the United States
will feel the effect of the decision.
This controversy was begun when
the United States district attorney
for the Southern District of Ohio.
filed eleven cases against the Balti-
more & Ohio Southwestern Railroad
company, claiming that 1t had carried
as many shipments of live stock from
shippers in various points in Illinois
to Cincinnati without unloading the
stock for rest, all in violation of the
Twenty Eight Hour Law
The railroad admitted the ship
ment and it's detention beyond the
statutory time but II averred guilt of
only one offense because all the snip
ments were carried in one train ex-
pressed a willingness to pay fine
for one violation.
The district court consolidated the
cases and assessed single penalty
The circuit court of appeals for the
Sixth district reversed that decis. m
he case then WAS brought to the
supreme court by the railroad. Briefs
m botn sides of the controversy have
been filed with the court. Counsel
for the railroad Is headed by Judson
Harmon, now governor of Ohio. Scli-
citor General Bowers of the Depart
ment of Justice, has directed the fight
on behalf of the United States.
In the brief of tho railroad counsel,
it is contended that the train is the
factor of offenses. because live stock
is moved in trains.
IF there be confinement in cars
Neyond twenty-eight hours during
ansit under circumstances which
constitute a violation of the statute,
1t must be the fault of the train, I"
says the brief. Congress has not
said whether the offenses shall be per
head of stock, per shipment, per car
load. or per train load. If congress
had intended there should be a fine
of $500, tthe maximum penalty for
one offense), for each head of stock
delayed. or for each shipment delayed
or for each carload delayed, 1t was
rule of strict Interpretation OF penal
statutes, the only reasonable con-
struction of the statute is that the
detention of all stock on the same
train constitutes but one offense.
Congress did not deem 1t neces-
sary to be so severe as to permit
fine of $500 for each shipment In a
train load containing possibly fifty
shipments, when single fine of $500
would answer as we'll"
Several routes lead to the conclu-
sion that the separate shipment was
meant as the basis, the government
contends.
SUPPOSE cattle are loaded into
cars by the carrier and kept there
more than % hours without unload
ing before the cars are put into any
train" says Solicitor General Bowers
in his brief. "Is the train the unit
of offense. though there has been no
train?"
He asked the same question where
cattle had been sidetracked in cars
and the train proceeded. In the case
of cattle not being fed after they were
unloaded he claimed the train plainly
was not meant to be the unit.
Indeed. the word train does not
once occur in the act" he says.
He further contends that his point
is proved by means of the provisions
regarding owners consent to the eX
tension of time from % to 36 hours.
THE owners consent affects mis-
shipment. and only his shipment,
whether 1t Is in train with other
shipments of live stock or not: and
the result is that the rule of conduct
for the carrier varies as to different
shipments. The shipment being the
unit as to which the carriers conduct
is prescribed by statute, it must
equally be the unit of the carriers
misconduct through violation of the
prescribed rule of conduct concerning
the shipment"
The cour5 may take some time be-
fore handing down a decision in the
case.